Winston Churchill once said “ We shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us”. In sociological contexts we notice that human beings of any races develop and nurture their culture, but at the same time they are very much shaped by their own culture. Upon observing the widespread use of IT gadgets and digital means of communication such as hand-phone and the internet, we would agree that a new culture (of communication) is developing. In Malaysia, for example, an official report says that by mid December 2006, there were more than 17 millions registered hand phone numbers and the number of internet user are increasing rapidly day by day. However, if we agree with Churchill, and as being indicated by some communication experts, a worth pondering question needs to be answered: are we really controlling the technology or the technology is controlling us?
Of course, our answers would fall into one of, at least, three categories: we are controlling the technology, the technology are controlling us, or We and technology are controlling each other. Nevertheless, Here I would share with you some ideas of how this new mode of communication is influencing our interpersonal interaction and judgments, and how we could possibly handle it.
I am currently joining 5 email groups. The total members of these groups reach 500. They are mostly Indonesians currently staying in Australia, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The interesting part is that most of them never meet each other. They only interact on the line. Joining these groups is enough to keep me busy selecting which emails worth reading and which ones to be deleted (even without reading them first).
However, as an email group is actually a kind of virtual community nurturing a virtual culture, it is interesting to watch how these people project themselves through their emails and being identified by others members solely from what they write. So far, my observation finds that the interactions are much more chaotic than the face to-face-interaction. This might due to the fact that in an email group, once you post your idea, you are actually inviting the whole population of the group to read, evaluate and respond to you. You might expect tens of responses to a single issue. When you get negative feedbacks, the whole population witness it. Then you have to “save your face” by posting a rebuttal. This later grows into a long and unnecessary, often insulting, debate without a conclusion. How could this happen among people who never see each other? There might be some explanations, but I think this one must be there: the nature of the email interaction which is void of physical identification has put the members in a comfortable position to freely write what they want to write. It seems that “nothing to lose” type of interaction is operating here.
Another story, I once sent an SMS to a new friend whom I have only met once. I wrote: “Hi, how is your weekend? Still busy preparing for the presentation?”. This person replied: “Yup, really busy. Thanx”. Of course, the reply clearly informed me that this friend was busy and did not expect any further SMS exchange at that particular time. However, this text made me feel that I had been responded to inappropriately. It was not a finely-tuned reply. A picture of the personality of this new friend instantly appeared in my mind. I knew that my judgment might be subjective and, to some extent, premature, and biased. But I thought the story would have been merrier if it had been a face to face interaction, or if this friend has been aware of the issue and possessed the skills of handling SMS-mediated interactions.
In a face-to-face interaction our judgment of a person’s personality is primarily shaped by his or her tendency in verbal communication. This way, we normally categorize a person as talkative, quiet, friendly, extrovert, introvert, etc (even smart or stupid). Also, in face-to-face interactions our interpretation of a partner’s verbal language is made easy by the help of such extra-linguistic features as context, mimic, gesture, tone, and intonation. However, in the current mode of phone / hand phone or internet communication (SMS or email) these features are not or only partly available (unless you are using 3G). Thus, the written texts are taken as the sole reference for meaning making and interpretation. The hypothesis is that the judgment resulted from this method of meaning making and interpretation will accumulate into our perception of the person. The worst is that such a perception could possibly be wrong and misleading.
To conclude, the spread of digital interaction with all its positive and negative impacts is unavoidable. Just like what Churchill said, our life might be being shaped by this new form of interaction. But we can still make the most out of it while preserving the values of face-to-face interpersonal interaction. Hence, I think, the issue of “healthy” digital interaction etiquette and skills is important, particularly those pertaining written messaging (SMS and Email). Here are some ideas that come to my mind:
Ø As SMS and email are the most commonly used mode of digital communication (even they are slowly replacing face-to-face interaction), allocate your time to treat them fairly as your new form of genuine interaction. A five minute allocation of time could save you a good friend.
Ø Structure your text carefully. People identify you based on what you write.
Ø Do not forget the greetings. You like to be greeted, so do the others.
Ø Do not over-contract your language
Ø Be sufficient.
Of course, our answers would fall into one of, at least, three categories: we are controlling the technology, the technology are controlling us, or We and technology are controlling each other. Nevertheless, Here I would share with you some ideas of how this new mode of communication is influencing our interpersonal interaction and judgments, and how we could possibly handle it.
I am currently joining 5 email groups. The total members of these groups reach 500. They are mostly Indonesians currently staying in Australia, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The interesting part is that most of them never meet each other. They only interact on the line. Joining these groups is enough to keep me busy selecting which emails worth reading and which ones to be deleted (even without reading them first).
However, as an email group is actually a kind of virtual community nurturing a virtual culture, it is interesting to watch how these people project themselves through their emails and being identified by others members solely from what they write. So far, my observation finds that the interactions are much more chaotic than the face to-face-interaction. This might due to the fact that in an email group, once you post your idea, you are actually inviting the whole population of the group to read, evaluate and respond to you. You might expect tens of responses to a single issue. When you get negative feedbacks, the whole population witness it. Then you have to “save your face” by posting a rebuttal. This later grows into a long and unnecessary, often insulting, debate without a conclusion. How could this happen among people who never see each other? There might be some explanations, but I think this one must be there: the nature of the email interaction which is void of physical identification has put the members in a comfortable position to freely write what they want to write. It seems that “nothing to lose” type of interaction is operating here.
Another story, I once sent an SMS to a new friend whom I have only met once. I wrote: “Hi, how is your weekend? Still busy preparing for the presentation?”. This person replied: “Yup, really busy. Thanx”. Of course, the reply clearly informed me that this friend was busy and did not expect any further SMS exchange at that particular time. However, this text made me feel that I had been responded to inappropriately. It was not a finely-tuned reply. A picture of the personality of this new friend instantly appeared in my mind. I knew that my judgment might be subjective and, to some extent, premature, and biased. But I thought the story would have been merrier if it had been a face to face interaction, or if this friend has been aware of the issue and possessed the skills of handling SMS-mediated interactions.
In a face-to-face interaction our judgment of a person’s personality is primarily shaped by his or her tendency in verbal communication. This way, we normally categorize a person as talkative, quiet, friendly, extrovert, introvert, etc (even smart or stupid). Also, in face-to-face interactions our interpretation of a partner’s verbal language is made easy by the help of such extra-linguistic features as context, mimic, gesture, tone, and intonation. However, in the current mode of phone / hand phone or internet communication (SMS or email) these features are not or only partly available (unless you are using 3G). Thus, the written texts are taken as the sole reference for meaning making and interpretation. The hypothesis is that the judgment resulted from this method of meaning making and interpretation will accumulate into our perception of the person. The worst is that such a perception could possibly be wrong and misleading.
To conclude, the spread of digital interaction with all its positive and negative impacts is unavoidable. Just like what Churchill said, our life might be being shaped by this new form of interaction. But we can still make the most out of it while preserving the values of face-to-face interpersonal interaction. Hence, I think, the issue of “healthy” digital interaction etiquette and skills is important, particularly those pertaining written messaging (SMS and Email). Here are some ideas that come to my mind:
Ø As SMS and email are the most commonly used mode of digital communication (even they are slowly replacing face-to-face interaction), allocate your time to treat them fairly as your new form of genuine interaction. A five minute allocation of time could save you a good friend.
Ø Structure your text carefully. People identify you based on what you write.
Ø Do not forget the greetings. You like to be greeted, so do the others.
Ø Do not over-contract your language
Ø Be sufficient.
1 comment:
gue rasa lo plagiat tulisan orang, gue baca kok artikel lo.... hahahaha... trus satu lagi " gau ga tertarik sama CV lo"
Post a Comment