McLuhan argues that it is not the medium but our access to medium that is important as a point to analyze and experience new media. What is so revolutionary is not the media itself but just the fact that people can widely use a given form of digital media. I think more compelling than this recent availability which unquestionably has changed the way people experience the world is that we want this access.
People are constantly searching for the next big thing in terms of technology. They will wait all night to gain admission when Steve Jobs announces the new technologies apple has come up with. Everything is about the craze, but I think it's not as simple as people wanting to 'keep up with the Jones.' Having the hot technology isn't so much about cultural capital in my opinion as it is about convenience. Time, you can't put a price on time, at least not in American society. Most popular appliances are geared towards minimizing work time and maximizing leisure. We choose what is quick as opposed to what is tradition. I think it is much more interesting to look at the way in which people flock to digital media for the ways in them doing so is conventional than the ways in which it is revolutionary.
I think this is a reflection of the way in which people prioritize in general, or potentially a cue into how they will prioritize. We read about how access to media can mold, or in the opinion of some, be the way in which we mold and communicate with each other. Many Americans are comfortable with the subtly, or not so subtly, manipulative ways of media in our country. News is largely a monopolized business. It is our invaluable time that I makes us readily turn on the tv or hop on the web to find our news from often limited sources. I hate to generalize, but I'm going to, most Americans do not take the time to investigate the companies from which they get their news, or respond to articles or stories that they find to be inaccurate or misrepresentative. I doubt that the way in which people will use media to break down any sort of status quo unless there exists some compelling advantage to doing so, and unless they will be awarded with time.

You make a good point that a lot of people try to find new technology that will require less effort, which makes me wonder what direction our society is heading towards. Will we continue to invent new gadgets that make our lives easier but less meaningful? An old example is the use of e-mail versus the more personal, hand-written letter. Sending an e-mail is faster but a written letter has a personal touch. Besides detracting from thoughtfulness, new technology also makes us lazier. We go online more and browse the Internet for hours. We play video games; some live to play video games. We have enough time but we would rather spend it on leisure activities.