The not so instant medium?

http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/JapanProj/FLClipart/Adjectives.html

Type up a letter, sign it off, press send, and it's in your recipient's inbox in a matter of seconds; e-mail is instant, right? Yes, in some respects, it certainly is; with e-mail, you can send out a party invitation a couple nights before, and have responses sent back the very next day. And you can work up to the very last minute of your deadline and still have no fear of your term paper being submitted en retard. Try doing that with a sealed and stamped envelope! This is why, in terms of its capacity to send, receive and distribute information, e-mail is indeed one of the most efficient and instant media we have.

However, in terms of the actual conversations that take place and of the information sharing that occurs, I can't help but think how the responses we send via e-mail are not actually instant. Let's think about his. In order to reply to an e-mail, you must first read the message that was sent to you. Then you must interpret it, craft a response to it, and send it back. The thing is, there is absolutely nothing that is forcing you to respond instantly and, as a result, the messages we get back from people are not always their immediate responses.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonigirl/2391732708/

Face to face conversations...now those are instant. The responses you get from talking to someone face to face are a lot more telling (and sometimes more honest) than what you get in an e-mail. First off, you can get a person's immediate reaction (whether they want you to or not), without having them say a word; you can read their facial expressions, body language and other physical cues. Secondly, if you ask someone a question face to face, they are expected to give you some sort of immediate response...and since not giving a verbal response is even a response, you can tell right away how they feel and what they think. You can't get much more instant than that!

With e-mail, however, I can read your message, type up a draft response, save it for later, take a break to do some thinking, and go over it again before I actually send it. All the while, you wouldn't know that I've even read it! For days, I could pretend to have been too busy to check and read your e-mail, while actually using the extra time to craft my response. And if I don't like what I'd initially planned to say, I can change it without you, or anyone else, knowing. In face to face situations, this would be impossible; once you say something, it's out there. there is no "delete comment" button or "edit response" option, it's simply out there...raw and spontaneous: the pleasures and horrors of truly instant communication. In regards to e-mail, the difference is that because I have the time to pick the exact words I want to use and because I can figure out the best possible way to say what I want, none of these conditions apply. As a result, I can step back to view and change my response before sending it. I have the opportunity to manipulate my words so that I may come across more persuasive (if I have to)...seem more honest...or even appear less upset than i actually am - definitely not something I would associate with instantaneity!

http://www.leap2.org/Images/EmailIcon.jpg

Of course, I'm not saying that conversing through e-mail is a bad thing, and I'm certainly not implying everyone is out to manipulate what they say (because for the most people, this is not the case at all!). E-mail is still an extremely efficient medium of communication and if you are not particularly adept at public speaking or giving spontaneous responses, it is wonderful. What I'm simply doing here is trying to grasp and re-evaluate this idea of instantaneity. In my opinion, there is more to instantaneity than being able to send information really quickly, and by realizing this, I think we can broaden our understanding of the benefits, limitations and consequences (both positive and negative) of using this technology. Everywhere you go, e-mail is at work - at school, at work, in our communities, in our homes - but in order to fully understand its potentials and restrictions, I believe it is necessary to look at its different components, like this, and under many different lights.

E-mail: The basics

To get started, I thought I'd first start with a basic list of pros and cons for e-mail use.

PROS
Convenience - Especially in the business world, you are not usually in the same place as the person with whom you wish to communicate. E-mail is a time-saving and generally less expensive way for people to exchange information.

Allows Asynchrony - Unlike attending board meetings and conventions, each person can decide when, where and how much time they will spend dealing with the information they receive.

CONS
Overload of Information - Because it is the sender who controls who are the recipients of the information, receivers are subject to an inbox full of junk mail and irrelevant information (i.e. "Fwd to all" function).

Loss of Social Skills - Relying on e-mail as a primary form of communication decreases one's ability and number of opportunities to converse face to face with others. As a result, they are not given the chance to develop social skill or become comfortable in social situations.

Loss of Context - Through reading and literary communication, important elements of oral communication (such as tone and body language) are lost. By its very nature, written information becomes fragmented and detached from its original context.

What now?
Once the basic pros and cons are identified, the questions begin to roll:
- To what extent to the pros weigh out the cons (or vice versa)?
- Overall, is e-mail beneficial to society? Or does it simply act to distance us from each other?
- Why, in a world with the capacity for instant video and satellite conferencing, do we still rely on/choose to communicate via e-mail and text-messaging?
- To what extent should human relations be compromised for efficiency and convenience of communication?

The Lost World

Change of plans. Even though it's no longer the latest or coolest form of communications technology, for the rest of the semester, I'm going to dredge up the lost world of e-mail. With cell phones and text-messaging and Facebook and Blackberries, no one really talks about e-mail anymore. We still use it, obviously, but it's old news. This is probably why I'm inclined to bring it up again; call me crazy, but I still think e-mail is one of the most essential and useful forms of electronic communication in contemporary society!



Let's face it; the developed world is running on constant overdrive. The way I see it, people are always competing to sell more mattresses, or produce longer lasting gum, or drive a better car than everyone else. We compete for scholarships, jobs, recognition, grades...you name it, people are fighting for it. As such, it is no wonder e-mail has become a huge part of our lives. We have this insatiable need for fast...rapid...instant communication so that we can keep up with everyone and everything that is going on around us.

It makes sense. Business people...professors...and even my friends...can no longer afford to wait for messages and documents to be sent through the old fashioned post; if they did, they would lose out because everyone around them would have already gotten the message 3 days earlier. Problem nowadays is that having instant access to knowledge is no longer an advantage, but a necessity.

Unless you sit to think about it, however, you don't realize how essential this seemingly simple technology is (and has been) to creating a successful and functional society. For the next three months, I'm going to look at the benefits, challenges, weaknesses, opinions...and whatever else I can find about the not-so-dead world of e-mail.