Brightinspiration says "actual physical engagement amongst people is much more effective than virtual." Zaid asks "does all this virtual activity replace the traditional networking methods of going to an event and meeting a person face to face?" and answers that "In a way, yes it does."
Bronislava worries that people are no longer comfortable confiding in each other and instead only trust their keyboards.
It seems to me that the underlying assumption in all of these posts is that online interaction takes place at the expense of in-person interaction, and vice versa. I think it's worth pointing out that in practice this doesn't seem to be the case.
A study by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that:
Contrary to fears that email would reduce other forms of contact, there is “media multiplexity”: The more contact by email, the more in-person and phone contact. As a result, Americans are probably more in contact with members of their communities and social networks than before the advent of the internet.In his book The Wealth of Networks, Harvard's Yochai Benkler surveys the literature and comes to the same conclusion:
Relations with one's local geographic community and with one's intimate friends and family do not seem to be substantially affected by Internet use. To the extent that these relationships are affected, the effect is positive....This fits with how most of us use the internet, and with how we use social networking. Online communication supplements in-person interaction. We keep up with friends whom we might otherwise see only once a week or month using Facebook, Twitter, and email.
...Connections with family and friends seemed to be thickened by the new channels of communication, rather than supplanted by them. (Chapter 10)
Just as online communication supplements in-person interaction, online communities frequently organize in-person meetings to strengthen their online ties. The progressive blogosphere comes together annually for Netroots Nation (formerly YearlyKos) and countless groups use Meetup.com to coordinate meetings and events offline.
Here's the best part... Where do we get all the extra time to augment our relationships with email and social networking, according to Benkler? By watching less TV!
I agree with your analysis, especially the idea that "online communication supplements in-person interaction." However, it seems that you only addressed personal communication and not business communication, except in passing with the reference to Meetup. There have been a number of stories related to online networking as a place for business, and how to use things like Facebook to help with job searches (especially in this economy), but I wonder if the reliance on the internet for such things is detrimental to or positive for the business world. It seems to me that this is a realm in which online networking would, for the most part, replace the need for face-to-face contact, and would negate the need for a handshake or for a lunch with a client. This may be viewed as a more efficient way of doing things, but isn't there still a need for face-to-face business networking? When looking to hire someone, isn't there still a need for the "gut instinct," and is there a worry that the mass-database of resumes and keyword searches of the same take the place of any personal experience or anecdotes? You may say that this sort of thing supplements the personal interview, but I worry that it may shut some outstanding candidates out before the face-to-face meetup.
ReplyDeleteOne post on MediaShift (http://tinyurl.com/ceqnbw) indicated that it may be a cultural difference, so is there a worry that the difference might put America behind other more traditionally communicative countries?
Another interesting point is the difference of medium. I'm reading a fun book now by Regina Lynn, titled "The Sexual Revolution 2.0", in which Lynn suggests some wonderful ways to integrate technology into personal relationships. (And, of course, the bedroom!)
ReplyDeleteIn any event, she points out that the *written* word is often overlooked in favor of the *spoken* word (specific to the book, that the writing can have just a profound psychological and/or physiological affect as any spoken word or even physical touch). Emails, tweets, texts, and IMs are to the 21st century what handwritten letters were to the 19th. I feel it's safe to say that we talk differently in writing than we do in person (employ a different psychological state of mind, probably due to our increased editorial power over what we're saying; as in, without the pressure of responding in realtime), no matter the context of that writing (business or casual). In that light, I believe we are only ever offering an incomplete picture of ourselves if we use online networks exclusively, or rely on them for all of our day-to-day correspondence with whomever we wish to keep in touch with. So--similar with your own conclusions--these networks are best used to augment traditional forms of communication, not supplant them, and therein I believe lies their power and their interest to their users.
In short, social networks and the technology that drives them don't really alter our dialogue: they expand it. My two cents. :)
Evan - that's really interesting. I'd love to learn more about the psychological differences between various mediums of communication.
ReplyDeleteKarlene - My guess is that the broad argument I made about online vs in person generally also holds for business. It's sort of an empirical question. Are interviews, business lunches, trade shows, etc. being replaced with online communication? I wonder.
Unfortunately, for me, the internet has taken the place of some face-to-face communication. I have found that rather than call a friend I haven't seen in a while to meet up for dinner, I might send an email with a "information dump" of everything that has been going on in my life since we last talked and ask for one from them in return. My own failings, I know, but technology has made it oh-so-easy.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, my friends who use Facebook have been able to reconnect with people they have not talked to since highschool. This connection is not in place of a face-to-face meeting, geography making that impossible, so it is an incredibly useful tool in making old relationships new again.
Is one type of interaction preferable to another? I myself dubbed emailing my friend lazy rather than making an in-person effort. Would we make the in-person effort if we didn't have the online option? Isn't some sort of relationship better than no relationship at all?