Introduction
The rapid advancements in mobile and computing technology in the last decade have resulted in a global network of information. People are now able to access a wealth of data at their fingertips and can communicate with others located remotely nearly anywhere across the globe. However, the nature of interaction has moved from a predominant face to face mode to one where the device and text or images displayed in it are the mediator for all communication between two people. Therefore, the need for in-person communication has lessened, as has the need for speech and therefore the need for better management of verbal communication. Through the tools of computers and cell phones, it is now possible to engage with a multitude of people both in one-on-one as well as one-to-many conversations, without the members ever having to come face to face. This has really brought people together and shrunk the size of the world, but has also created a small crisis in communication for people.
Communication through Social Media
The single most common medium of communication in the new world of social media is the written word. Since English is the most common language used by people across the world, social media has evolved to become largely Anglo-centric, although certain region-specific applications and platforms continue to be popular such as Renren in China and Mixi in Japan. However, for the overwhelming majority, English continues to be the language in which most communication is based. English in itself is a very broad language with different versions of it used everywhere. Each region, country has its version with local slang, regional words and versions thrown in. Since English is not a phonetic language, understanding it can be difficult when English is not a first language. Conveying nuances and implied meanings becomes very difficult for this kind of communication.
Most verbal speech is accompanied by a number of non-verbal gestures and expressions that help emphasize or mediate the tone of the statement being made. Without these it is easy to misconstrue what is being said, and can create great misunderstanding. It was for this reason that the use of emoticons (emotion icons) was started. In an earlier generation, these were depicted by text symbols – a colon, hyphen and close parenthesis (: - )) depicted a smile, for example. Today, most of the social media platforms have created a click and use list of emoticons that make it much simpler to use. These provide a simile of the facial expression to reflect the mood in which a particular statement is made. However, this does not fulfill the entire purpose of giving clarity to communication. However, the depth of emotions cannot be conveyed by these icons and so the conversation between people on social media tends to retain status quo, unlike a verbal conversation where the addition of emotions and non-verbal gestures can bring a depth to the flow of conversation.
According to Paul Booth, PhD, an assistant professor of media and cinema studies in the College of Communication at DePaul University in Chicago, “With every new communication technology comes changes in the style and type of interpersonal communication” (Keller, 1). there are three key issues coming to the fore in social media conversations. First, when we communicate through social media, our position is to trust the person at the other end, and the conversation tends to be more open. Second, the strength of a social relationship is not improved by social media conversations - it is more likely to remain static. The best example of this is our list of Facebook friends – we have hundreds, but with how many do we actually communicate beyond “likes” and “shares”? Last, due to the weak nature of connections on social media platforms, we are more likely to carry on conversations with people who agree to our point of view rather than those opposed, thereby reducing the richness of the conversation taking place, as the viewpoints are less diverse (Keller, 2013). Since communication through social media is leaner, relationship building is much faster between the two parties when communicating. This is due to the constant flow of two way communication, which does not require one user to stop communicating while the other is making a point, as is the case with a verbal conversation. Therefore the volume of information being shared can be much higher than in the case of a verbal conversation, subject to only the reading and typing speeds of the individuals. Therefore, trust between the two parties is implied until broken. However, this has its own drawbacks, with the greater possibility of more being communicated than was meant to be, as well as the possibility of it being misunderstood.
Since the device is the mediator of the conversation, in most cases, whatever has been typed earlier is stored for posterity and cannot be taken back. The combination of these two factors can result in disastrous consequences for someone who is not cautious or controlled in his or her temperament. An inadvertent slip could result in information being let out which may be potentially damaging to either party or to a third person. Such information once out in the public domain can be disastrous or at least embarrassing for the person whom it concerns. In the recent past, there have been instances of protests and incidents over comments posted by individuals on what were essentially meant to be private conversations, but since they were on social media, became part of the public domain and created controversies. Often, the personal opinion of a single individual can be misconstrued to take on political, racial and other meanings, none of which were necessarily applicable when the comment was made, in the context that it was made. Therefore, it becomes essential that in the case of communication through social media one is careful of what one says, since the social media conversation cannot take the position of a verbal conversation in the aspect of confidentiality, since the one aspect not guaranteed by social media is privacy (Drussel, 2012).
Safeguarding privacy in Social media conversations
When it comes to privacy in networked publics, social norms are often downplayed (Boyd and Marwick, 2011). Social platforms are therefore considered public spaces, where anyone is welcome to look in and be a part of the conversation. This can have the inadvertent consequence of letting out information that was originally meant to be restricted. Since social media platforms are electronic media that convey data, this data can also be accessed at a later date and prove damaging, unlike a spoken conversation which can be forgotten and erased from one’s memory. Therefore, the first rule of social media conversations is to be extremely conservative about the information being shared. If there is anything in the conversation that has the potential to hurt or create conflict, it is best to not write it down where it can be found. For example, a disparaging comment about one’s employer should never be made in a social media platform, as it may become grounds for dismissal as has happened in several cases.
Social media conversations are in many ways an advance on the way we communicate. They offer significant advantages over one-to-one conversations in helping to disseminate information faster and allow us to keep in touch more effectively. However, the flip side of this equation is also that nothing in our lives is really private any more, and one can expect everyone to know details of one’s personal life far more easily than in the past. The same applies for conversations. It is tempting to put one’s views and arguments out for public consumption when one believes there is an audience that listens, agrees and sympathizes (Adler, et al, 2012). However, those same views may generate conflict as well, and once they are posted on social media will be stored there for posterity. Therefore, it is crucial that a proper balance is sought between the use of social media and actual conversations. This is the best way of safeguarding one’s personal life and viewpoint as well.
Personal Learning
Having written about the topic of social media communication, I have also learnt that the information I share with others through my own social media conversations is likely to create rifts in my relationships with others. A point of view expressed over a particular incident may later be misconstrued as a way of thinking, and this can irrevocably damage relationships. I have therefore started to maintain a control over the types of comments and discussions that I put up on social media platforms. I have also realized that at times, the written word is insufficient to convey one’s feelings and opinions and have started having more real conversations with friends and family. It is my resolve that verbal communication will continue to play an important role in my communication style, instead of succumbing to the endless clatter of keys when using social media.
References
Adler, R, Rosenfeld, L and Proctor, R “Interplay: The Process of Interpersonal Communication”, 2012, 12th Edition.
Boyd, D and Marwick A “Social Privacy in Networked Publics: Teens’ Attitudes, Practices, and Strategies”, Microsoft Research, Paper for discussion at the Privacy Law Scholars Conference on June 2, 2011 in Berkeley, CA.
Drussel, J “Social Networking and Interpersonal Communication and Conflict Resolution Skills among College Freshmen”, Master of Social Work Clinical Research Papers, Paper 21, 2012. St. Catherine University & University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Keller, M “Social Media and Interpersonal Communication”, Social Work Today, 2013, Vol. 13 No. 3 P. 10, Web. Last accessed 2 December 2014.
