I hear more and more about the internet, and how it's going to change the world. Especially chat and its ability to bring people together, but chat is not the same as real conversation. My concern is that some people don't realize this. A bird in the hand is worth more than four and twenty blackbirds baked in a pie. That's not quite what I mean but it's close enough. What I mean to say is that what we already have without computers is sometimes better than the promises of what computers can give us. What we've got is a wonderful world, sitting just outside our door, a bird in the hand you might say. What is being promised is the intenet revolution, two in the bush as the old saying goes. Unfortunately those two have been digitized, compressed, transposed, FTP'd and HTML'd. What you end up with doesn't look like the original. That's where the baked into a pie comes in, and who wants to eat a pie made with birds?
Chat is limited in ways that real conversations aren't. Sure, chat has some advantages. Most conversations don't occur near a computer, so there's no chance to visit a website as soon as it's mentioned. No travel is required; you can talk to friends across the city or around the world. That's about it, two reasons for chat. A thousand for having a face to face talk, and what way does the media say that society is heading? Towards the technology, of course, and I sincerely hope it doesn't happen. A lot would be lost if people stopped talking to each other in person. Don't get me wrong, I like to chat (and I do it a lot), but being face to face is so much better.
Depth is probably the most important of what's lost. Chat and IM are both fairly shallow; not much really gets said. I've been in chatrooms where half the conversation is A/S? (age/sex?) . In real life this translates as "How old are you?" and "Duh". In almost all cases gender is obvious and chances are no one will ask age either. In real life you can tell if some one is 14 or 40. A lot of time is wasted just figuring out the basics. Time that could be spent really getting to know someone.Another obstacle to depth is typing speed. If someone poses a question for instance:
MrQandA: What does everyone think on abortion?
Even if you're a fast typist while you type:
highIQ: I think that this is a very complex subject and it should not be taken lightly. It cannot be summed up in a for or against statement.
Others have already said:
RylQueen: Abortion sucks
RandomGal: its murder
Sue12754: women have the right to choose
BrainDed: anyone seen <insert latest movie here>
FredtheDuck: it sucks, abortion not the movie
Siskull: great, the movie
FoulMuth: I laughed my *%$ off
Sue12754: it sucked
WanntoBE: it was the bomb
genericLOLguy: LOL
The topic is already changed and the level of the conversation is lowered. Even if the topic stays the same long enough for you to make your comment, it will probably end in a flame war. Everyone talks at once and hardly anyone worries about what they say. In the end, all the people in the chatroom have had their say but very few of them listened to what was being said. I can't say I blame them; rarely is there any real content to listen to.
In a real life, conversation is different. If more than one person talks it stops either of them from speaking and usually one stops and lets the other continue. Changes in subject are rarely abrupt. If someone wants to change the subject it must be a group consensus. I've seen people in a chat room ask the same question over and over until the subject is changed. Things that are rude in person are often overlooked online. While real listening is still not guaranteed, in a face to face chat there is a bigger likelihood of real content and therefore a bigger reason to listen.
Plain text makes it hard to get your point across; writing is definitely an art. A chatroom only allows what you can type in a few seconds. This removes almost all subtleties from the written word. I have found this leads to easy confusion when chatting. Sarcasm is often lost and the message taken literally. Simple statements lose their tone. "It was great" is hardly descriptive writing and an author would choose to convey him or herself in more words. In a conversation, however, the same statement is backed by emotion and tone of voice. Both lead to a greater understanding of the degree of "greatness". Chat just doesn't get the message across.
There are other messages that are lost in the translation to text snippets. Before I go on, I want to make it clear I'm not looking for love online, but I have puzzled over how flirting happens online. When it comes to the opposite sex, well, I'm about as aware as a brick. I like women; I just miss all the cues. I wouldn't know flirting if it came up and sat in my lap (and it has, though I didn't realize it at the time). How am I supposed to know when I'm being flirted with? Would it happen like this?
FemaleChatter: What do you look like?
Me: Brown hair and eyes, about 5'9", I'm in decent shape.
Female Chatter: <flirting> You sound cute
Somehow I don't think it works that way. I'd like to make the connection between ambiguity in flirting and ambiguity in chat overall. I've rarely seen a person tell what tone of voice they're using, and having to tell a person really kills the message. This leads to a problem: how do you know what a person means by a given statement? You could ask, but guess what? You probably wouldn't have to ask in real life, not if the only question is what tone they meant the message in. A quote from the surf guru (don't worry I won't be quoting him again) "Your Elvis impersonation falls on deaf ears in a chatroom."
You can't gesture in a chatroom. I can't nod in the affirmative, or shake my head no. I can't hold my hands apart to show how big the one that got away was. I can't give an old friend a hug when I haven't seen them in a while. I can't give a friend a shoulder to cry on when something bad has happened. Sure I could type <big hug> or <holds hands apart at arms length> but it's just not the same. My friend or relative won't get to feel the warmth of a real embrace or see the grin on my face as I exaggerate the size of a fish.
Don't be fooled by the promises of the technological community. There is no substitute for real contact. People can't be digitized and sent over a phone line. Don't settle for :-) when you can see your friend smile at you in person. Our society is getting sold a bunch of hype and too many are swallowing it hook, line and sinker. I'm not a Luddite (check out my technical information page), but I don't want to lose all the important things that technology can't provide. People need other people. It's hardwired; if we don't get enough real contact, stuff gets messed up.
If you want more on the dangers of technology try "Silicon Snake Oil" by Clifford Stoll. It's a thoroughly enjoyable read. Go out and get it from your local library or bookstore. I know that dealing with paper pages can be scary at first, but once you get started it's a lot easier on the eyes than a monitor.
-Mixed Metaphor
Send Mail to:mixedmetaphor@yahoo.com
Home News Site Concept Essays Humor About Me FAQs Technical Info Links