The War On Facetime
Zak tested Penenberg's blood before and after he used Twitter for 10 minutes, sending and receiving tweets the whole time. He found that oxytocin levels went up substantially, and that stress hormones went down. This is great news, because other research has shown that people are more empathetic when their oxytocin levels go up, Zak said. They are more kind, honest and fair to others. In other words, people may be nicer - at least for about an hour - after they've been interacting with social media, he said. [...] "If your goal in life is to be connected to other people, how you connect doesn’t really matter - in person, online, it's all the same biology of connection [...]. -- CNN
The war on facetime isn't here yet. But it's coming. Some of us can't stand the thought that "interacting" online is qualitatively different from what we do in person -- which can hardly be summed up adequately as "interacting." So they use abstract words -- like "connecting" -- that make what we do in those two settings seem identical. They're not. That's not to say qualitative studies like Zak's are flawed or evil. Guess what happens when we write physical letters to each other? But Zak's mistake is to act as if anybody's "goal in life" is simply "to be connected to other people." That sounds to me like a fine means to any number of more fully human ends. Just because we're social creatures doesn't mean the point of life is socialization. When we define mere connection as an end, not a means, the war on facetime is on.
- Comment (4)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: The War On Facetime
This sounds similar to the old argument about whether technology dehumanizes us. On the qualitative value of various methods of interaction or connection, there is something about online social networking that dilutes, or renders dormant, certain face-to-face social behaviors or skills. A good representation of such effects can be found in the Pixar's WALL-E.
Humans, generally speaking, are social creatures. But I submit there are physiological and psychological effects that can be measured in an environment where human touch is involved. A comparison of such results to the online equivalent might be interesting.
A simple handshake, a slap on the back, or a hug is of far more value to me than text on a screen, or a silly emoticon.
May '10
Re: The War On Facetime
James Poulos, Ed.:
Excellent point.
Jul '10
Re: The War On Facetime
Yes, human beings are social animals, and social interactions are an enormous part of our lives. However, human beings practice all sorts of horrid social habits: attention seeking, cliquishness, exhibitionism, gossip, ad hominem argumentation, etc. The problem with newer social networking technologies is that they basically reinforce these bad aspects of social interaction without adding much to the good ones. And they facilitate anti-social behavior by removing the feedback loop inherent to face-to-face communication. This is not to say that these technologies are valueless (cf. this Ricochet forum in which I'm allowed to express my opinion to a large audience), but when they supplant the traditional forms of socialization, as I fear they are doing with the younger Facebook set, they will do more harm than good.
Re: The War On Facetime
Nice point, Mark. Here's Rod Dreher with more on Zak.