Secondary Orality and Rebus Techniques
The term kinetography,  coined by Thomas Edison about 1891 to define his new electro-mechanical communications device, could not embrace the parallel dialectical/rhetorical theory essential to modern multivariate media communication. It lacked parallel communication significance.
Theories must continually expand to support both discoursed and non-discoursed electronic communication. To this end, kinetographic theory consists of interdisciplinary communication protocols that manage meaning in parallel multivariate media complexes.
One may define kinetography as a dynamic, secondary orality (or technological form of verbal/visible, electronic-era, dialectic and rhetoric). Moreover, one may classify it as both dialectical and rhetorical because it communicates with both individuals and large audiences.
Kinetography uses media as tools and discounts the common belief that dialectic and rhetoric only relate to oral discourse. It organizes itself in associative (hypertextual) patterns in contrast to the linear way of developing formal speech.  It also contrasts with the accepted notion of classical rhetoric as a predominantly hierarchical oral and written discourse because of this hypertextual construct.
The contrast derives from the complexities of arrangement as functions that have parallel verbal/visible significance and associative patterns rather than hierarchies: an arrangement that better suits interdisciplinary communication. Importantly, electronic communications media contain aesthetic diversity that requires rational decision-making within both design and production processes. This thinking process lends itself to traditional forms of critical inquiry.
Unfortunately, educational technology units have become dominated by educational testing and by hardware specialists who have placed emphasis on software and hardware evaluation. This results from outmoded institutional structures and misguided emphasis on skills and career commitments. This adversely affects the education of the next generation that will become even more involved in the development of electronic communication collateral. Consequently, the key to verbal/visible communication change lies in changes in institutional roles and methods of inquiry. 
Overt polarization and intellectual incomprehension exist between scientists and sociologists. It also exists within the tri-culture of writers, designers, and computer programmers and has commonly caused communication among them virtually to cease.
Snow  metaphorically calls this a change from the managed frozen smile across a gulf of incomprehension, to an impolite resort to making faces and placing blame. Generally, an acute lack of understanding exists about how people influence others and become influenced themselves in technological or electronic environments.
Historical ignorance has caused dialectical and rhetorical theories used for understanding discourse (verbal language) to become outdated. They have become inadequate for understanding non-discourse (visible language) in mediated situations. One cannot understand what is happening unless one understands what happened. Furthermore, without a knowledge of history, one has no way of recognizing innovation, redundancy, or what people have tried before and found wanting.
Now, the technological culture (interested in the empirical, the experimental, and the behavioral) writes its own literature, speaks its own language, and pursues its own goals. Conversely, the humanities culture (interested in the literary, the aesthetic, and the humanistic) pursues parallel but different courses.
The relationship between empiricists and traditionalists in communication (like that of Snow's larger analysis of cultures) ranges from overt hostility to peaceful but separate coexistence.  The importance of theoretical reappraisal to deal with polarization and other concerns, which have evolved in multidisciplinary communication, seems obvious.
Computer scientists can easily address incompatibility in the networking and concatenation of electronic communications tools. However, it needs a systematic and probably complicated effort to solve the human communication and interdisciplinary problems. Both human communication and electronic communications do not bear reduction to cause and affect contingencies. 
Consequently, didactic procedures, designed by technocrats, do not suffice in any communication environment because the rules that govern meaning in human communication also apply to electronic communications.
Interdisciplinary communication research relates the contemporary with the historical, the linear with the associative, and the traditional with the experimental. Dialectic avoids the practice (used by scholars to prove that universal rhetorical principles self-perpetuate) of torturing concrete situations into serving as illustrations. It also favors dialectical/rhetorical conventions that follows general principles by blending the universal and the theoretical with the concrete and hypothetical. 
Kinetographic definitions pose different problems to those generally found in dialectic because they predominantly use the four master tropes: metaphor, metonym, synecdoche, and irony.  The construction of kinetographic definitions requires different protocols to those used in literal metonymy that call for word substitution. They require construction under rules that embrace the rebus principle. 
Metonymy (literal contiguity) and metaphor (oral similarity) become essential to the rebus principle.  In this regard, metonymy functions much wider than its formal rhetorical definition suggests. It uses scale manipulation in time and space similar to that which undergirds much postmodern art and music.
Metaphor deals with the manipulation of meaning and transforms words and graphics from their literal meaning into similes (analogies). Metonymy transforms metaphors that liken "this to that” and substitutes a function that illustrates "this for that.” Consequently, metonymy provides a nonmetaphoric, stable element that helps project and transform normative meaning. It overcomes the instability between projection and transformation that exists in metaphor.  This creates a verbal/visible literal/aesthetic balance, a balance achieved by tripartion: humanism, technique, and technology.
Unfortunately, current thinking and research stem from a linear notion of a particular speaker presenting a specific message to a specialized audience. Conversely, the Socratic method enables the creation of associative mosaics that use contemporary models that exert influence on the total multivariate pattern.
Interdisciplinary mosaics include the different methodologies and purposes of both dialectic and rhetoric and promote unity within the convention. They create multidimensional, multivariate "symbiosis" more appropriate to highly technological media configurations that address both literate and non-literate audiences.
The quantity and quality of these criteria result from Socratic interrogation. Through question and answer an open communication system develops. This system requires a symbiosis of general theory and universal principles (what should exist) with a concern for the concrete situation (what exists).
Lack of symbiosis through exclusive interest in either theory and principles or concrete situations results in a closed and inefficient communication system. For example, an experimenter who merely studies whether source credibility exerts an influence on a communication, and endeavors to hold all other variables constant, does not ask the important and interesting question: which multivariate combination exerts more influence in a given circumstance?