Let’s take this online.
Technology is pervasive. As the availability of portable devices, in conjunction with network bandwidth, becomes greater, so does our need for it to be accessible at all times. A Nokia “brick phone” once sat comfortably in your back pocket, but an iPhone’s preferred location is glued firmly to your hand, contact breaking only to eat (if necessary) and shower (for now).
We are in a state of perpetual connectedness (boyd 2012, p. 72), driven by a need to stay on the proverbial ball, and an insatiable thirst for information. With this constant state of connection comes a constant need to be present –but not in the ways we once were. We no longer need to be in the same office to be colleagues, and no longer need to actively reach out to maintain friendships. Concepts of time and space have transformed, taking our relationships with friends and family online, lifting boundaries previously enforced by distance, and changing our ideas about how and when we should be communicating (Siapera 2012, p. 191).
With the birth of social platforms, came the ability to publish the infinite details of our lives for the masses, to connect with people we know, those we used to know, and those we never would have crossed paths with otherwise (Murthy 2012, p. 9; Siapera 2012, p. 202). We can now stay up-to-date on our cousins’ vacations, participate in book clubs, and be active members of grassroots movements, simultaneously and all from the comfort of our own couches. Does this mean we are destined to become social recluses, misguided in our beliefs that we are interacting whilst wasting away from loneliness (TED-Ed 2013), or is it time to renegotiate what it means to be socially engaged?
Technology has broken down our social conventions, transforming them, and the possibilities are endless (boyd 2012, p. 75). It’s not about having the latest and greatest devices though, it’s about bettering our abilities to connect with people and information – our universal need to associate with others (boyd 2012, p. 73; Siapera 2012, p. 192). Being an accepted, useful member of a community is still important to us, but time is scarce and connecting with those geographically close-by somehow requires more effort than engaging with people anywhere on earth. Rather than being constrained to communicating with those who share a locality, we now seek to be grouped with those who share our interests and beliefs (Siapera 2012, p. 194), wherever they may be, in infinite, always “on”, digital communities.
Whilst the implications of these new communities are far-reaching and fluid, opening a whole realm of questions we don’t always have answers to (am I digging myself into a narrow-minded grave? did it even happen if it’s not on Instagram? did my Facebook data somehow get Trump elected???), I believe the positives far outweigh the negatives. The world is more connected than ever before. Instantly catching up with loved ones far and wide just requires decent network service. Any information we’ve ever dreamed of knowing (sometimes to be taken with a grain of salt) is literally at our fingertips. And if you’re ever feeling lonely, just write a status about it!
References
boyd, d 2012, 'Participating in the Always-On Lifestyle', in M Mandiberg (ed.) The Social Media Reader, NYU Press, New York, pp. 71-76.
Murthy, D 2012, Social Communication in the Twitter Age, Wiley, Oxford.
Siapera, E 2012, 'Socialities and social media', in Understanding new media, SAGE, London, pp. 191-208.
TED-Ed 2013, Connected, but alone?- Sherry Turkle, viewed 14 March 2018, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv0g8TsnA6c>.
Images
'A man and woman talk at the bar' 2013 [image], Liam Walsh, New Yorker, viewed 14 April 2018, <https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/explain-yourself-liam-walsh-cartoonist>.