It’s easy to see why NewComm technologies have become so popular. We live in a culture that is obsessed with speed – getting as much stuff done in one day as possible. NewComms provide us with a quick way to communicate. E-mails and text messaging allow us to quickly and reliably send messages to anyone anywhere. Facebook, Myspace, and other social networking websites put all of our friends in one place at our fingertips, and contacting them is just a few clicks away. NewComms give us an efficient and cost-effective way to speechify at each other at any time that we please.
Another strength of NewComms is that they are extremely versatile. As communications technology advances, people are finding it increasingly easier to engage in communications in times and situations that they would have previously found it at least difficult, if not impossible to communicate in (Snowden 113). For instance, many students are finding that it’s quite easy to use text messaging services in class, to continue or initiate conversations that are normally not permitted in a classroom setting. I can’t even count the number of times that I have seen students checking their e-mails or facebooks during class trips to the computer lab. Traditional communication etiquette states that it is poor manners to call someone on telephone after a certain hour of the night, for fear of waking up the whole family, but thanks to cell phones, it’s now perfectly acceptable to make a call at any hour of the night and get a hold of exactly the individual that you are trying to contact, without having to talk to an angry mother.
Some technologies (namely e-mails and text messages) provide the added bonus of being able to keep the messages that are sent to you in an electronically stored format. This allows you to refer back to messages at a later time (like having a built-in stenographer) or to keep particularly sappy or meaningful messages as keepsakes (Snowden 113).
With these and many other apparent “pros,” it’s easy to see why so many people are so enamored with NewComm technologies. Unfortunately, many people allow their enjoyment of these technologies, particularly text messaging and online social networking, to turn into a full-blown addiction that borders on a diagnosable condition (Snowden 113). I personally know many people who spend hours each day sending and receiving text messages (as many as a few thousand per day) or browsing through facebook or Myspace. I have talked to people who literally believe that they are incapable of living without a cell phone, and the number of people who are willing to interrupt a face to face conversation with a phone call or text message is quickly becoming a rude majority.
Along with addiction to communications technology, heavy users face many other problems that result from their NewComm dependence. Classical communications skills are deteriorating as formal modes of communication lose popularity and less emphasis is culturally placed on the importance of clarity, spelling, and grammar. People are becoming more and more dependent and used to using the crippled and simplified language that is commonly used in text messaging and e-mails (txt), making it impossible to pick up on nonverbal messages and linguistic subtleties that exist in real, face-to-face communication. Using simplified text forms of communication, we are unable to perceive the impact and emotions that come with the message, and are therefore incapable of really getting to know the people we are interacting with. (Hanson 92).
Each developed language in the world has four basic skills that are required for truly effective communication: listening, speaking, reading, and writing (Vethanayagam). When we use digital text communication, both listening and speaking are out of the picture, and unless we take very great care when composing and interpreting the messages being sent, reading and writing can take a big hit as well. So, without speaking or listening, or even functional versions of reading and writing, what sort of language are we left with? We are left with a broken language that has shed much of the meaning and emotion that is apparent in traditional communication. Digital text messages (in e-mail or text message form) provide for us an easy way to give ourselves the illusion of having communicated well, when in reality all we are doing is confusing the messages and frustrating the communicators (Duffy). Snowden speaks of the language of text messaging as a language that “… requires the disruption and manipulation of conventions of grammar and syntax” (Snowden 114).
In addition to replacing the traditional rules of spelling and grammar with a short-handed chicken-scratch sort of pop culture language, our text-message culture is losing touch with the true meanings of many of its words and phrases, and likewise replacing them with condensed or butchered versions. It is this sort of language that John Powers refers to as “lazy English,” the use of euphemisms, idioms, and words even when we don’t know their true meaning (A Loss for Words). For instance, the common phrase, “The proof is in the pudding,” is a botched, nonsensical variation of the proverb, “The proof of the pudding is in the eating” (A Loss for Words). Our culture is losing touch with its communication values. Admittedly, one would be hard pressed to draw the line connecting text messaging to the deterioration of English proverbs, but the fact remains that our language as a whole is slowly falling into a state where definition is giving way to efficiency; our entire language is becoming a shorthand shadow of itself.
Some consider the dialect that is spoken in text messages (a language called “txting”) to pose a direct threat to the educational futures of students, citing examples in which schoolchildren have turned in entire essays written in txt shorthand (Carrington 170). In response to the question, “What did you do over summer break?” the following essay was turned in by a thirteen-year-old female student in Scotland:
“My smmr hols wr CWOT. B4, we used 2go2 NY 2C my bro, his GF & thr 3 :- kids FTF. ILNY, it’s a gr8 plc.”
She was trying to say, “My summer holidays were a complete waste of time. Before, we used to go to New York to see my brother, his girlfriend, and their three screaming kids face-to-face. I love New York, it’s a great place” (Carrington 161). It’s easy to see why teachers would consider this language to be a threat to the education of their students. For starters, unless you are knee-deep in the muck of popular culture, that sort of essay is going to look like a bunch of garbled letters, or at least like some sort of code. It would be completely illegible to a teacher that is used to traditional English writing, which makes it quite difficult to grade, especially if there is a grade for grammar and mechanics. Some have linked the language of txting to a “literary crisis” in individuals and educational institutions (Carrington 171).
The question now becomes, “What can we do?” Obviously, no one wants a “literacy crisis” on their hands, and most reasonable people would agree that it’s generally not a good thing when the language you are using falls apart under your feet. If that were to happen, we would all have to learn to speak German or something, and I personally don’t think I have the salivary glands to handle that. However, the solution is not so simple as getting rid of NewComm technologies, and going back to the “good old days.” NewComms have already been woven too deeply into the fabric of our culture to simply throw them out. But, we must be exceedingly careful in our usage of them. We must monitor ourselves in our communication, to make sure that we communicate with integrity. We must make sure that the messages we send can be well understood by the people that we are sending them to. We must keep a sharp eye on how we use NewComm technologies like social networking sites and chat rooms, and be aware of the dangers associated with them (Carrington 170).
In the end, it’s not enough to whine and complain about the adverse effects that modern communications technologies are having on our society, and it’s not possible to throw them out. As they are now, these technologies are partially responsible for a deterioration in the language that we use, but we as users are just as responsible. We need to be conscious and aware of how we use NewComms in our lives, and make sure that we don’t allow modern computer-mediated technology to take over the good old fashioned kind. Our language is in trouble, and only you can do something to save it.
Works Cited
Carrington, Victoria. "Txting: the end of civilization (again)?" Cambridge Journal of Education 35 (2005): 161-75. Communication and Mass Media Complete. EBSCO Host. David L. Rice Library, Evansville, IN. 27 Feb. 2009
Duffy, Michael. "Why your lazy e-mail habit is bad for business." Advertising Age 26 Nov. 2007: 24-24. Communication and Mass Media Complete. EBSCO Host. David L. Rice Library, Evansville, IN. 27 Feb. 2009
Hanson, Jarice. 24/7 How Cell Phones and the Internet Change the Way We Live, Work, and Play. New York: Praeger, 2007. 92.
Powers, John. "A Loss for Words - The Boston Globe." Boston.com. 8 Feb. 2004. The Boston Globe. 27 Feb. 2009
Snowden, Collette. "Cstng A pwfr4l spLL: D evOLshn f SMS (Casting a Powerful Spell: The Evolution of SMS)." The Cell Phone Reader: Essays in Social Transformation. Vol. 34. New York: Peter Lang, 2006. 113-15.
Vethanayagam, S. Anand Lenin. "Internet Usage and Its Effect on Reading Skill among the College Students - A Case Study of Coimbatore Region." Language in India 8 (2008): 1-1. Communication and Mass Media Complete. EBSCO Host. David L. Rice Library, Evansville, IN. 27 Feb. 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment