The addictive nature of social networking sites has facilitated the downward spiral of communication skills.

09/05/2010 reneeh 19 comments

When a new communication medium is introduced, individuals are quite taken by its uniqueness or novelty. A definition of communication by Lierouw (as cited in Israelsen) is the “process of sharing ideas, information, and messages with other in a particular time and place” (Israelsen, A, p2, 2005) Participating in the information age requires individuals and societies to quickly and effectively communicate and disseminate information like never before. This is particularly evident in regards to communication on social networking sites which has resulted in communication methods being shortened to, as few characters as possible, it has diminished spontaneity as individuals can delete or reword conversations before they post their comments and more importantly the devastating effect social networking sites have on the transitioning of “slang” into the everyday dealings with face to face communication with individuals in the real world. The effects of social networking sites has been a concern for a long time where there are concerns of the social influences it has on communication with family and friends, and the addiction it causes.

Internet addiction is a fairly new term and is based upon subjective experiences of self reported internet addicts. Recent reports by Brady (as cited in Young) has indicated that some on-line users were becoming addicted to the Internet in much the same way that others became addicted to drugs, alcohol, or gambling (Young, K, p2, 2004). Addiction of any kind is normally affiliated with the user having an uncontrollable urge, which leads to a loss of control and a preoccupation with use.

“Longitudinal internet use, explore and investigate whether internet use has directly decreased face-to-face communication, another research company, Internet Addiction Research, main focus is try to find which psychological factors lead to internet addiction and what kind of social dysfunction effect this addiction bring to users rephrase” (Jenny GR, 2009).

As the Internet permeates our lives there will be more reported cases of internet addiction, which will ultimately affect the way in which users will continue to communicate with each other.

A social networking site is a “web-based service that allows people to set up public or semi-public profiles sharing interests, photographs and generally letting people know what they are up to” (Dune, A, Lawlor, p46, 2010). Profiles offer a forum for communication and interaction between participants, usually in the form of a comments section. Social networking sites have evolved from an early online chat to an internet based form of a virtual community, which attract millions of user’s world wide, and are not bounded by age limits, with many individuals embracing social networking sites, and now have integrated this communication method into their daily lives. These sites are based on the premise of relationship creation and maintenance, either with existing members of a social circle or connecting people with similar or shared interests (Dune,A, Lawlor, p46, 2010). The rapid proliferation and acceptance of technology during such a relative short period of time can cause great concerns as it can have drawbacks, such as addiction, communication barriers. Over recent years several social networking sites have become increasingly popular amongst people. More recently however, has been the explosion of how communication is focused within social networking site like, Bebo Facebook, Twitter and Secondlife.

Bebo is a social networking site that has been shaped both by its designers and its participants as an age-appropriate web site for 14-16 year olds Bebo is a popular way to communicate for young teens, with the main focus being a degree of gratifications they receive by using the site and by examining other ‘friends’ pages it allows them to communicate with others. Communication on Bebo differs from face to face communication, a recent article describes this difference, “The affordance of online communication in giving time to think, either to compose clever ‘‘come backs’’ or to revise wording” (Willet, R, p293, 2009). Online communication on Bebo can be viewed as having a non personal nature, as it provides an environment that can offer its user’s relative shelter from embarrassment or rejection by allowing teenagers to filter online communication. The context in which they communicate has an effect on how the message is transmitted and how it is received is also having a profound effect on the way in which teens communicate. The context of online communication may bring with it additional issues that will have an effect on the intended message. Parental supervision and interference on teens social networking sites have seen the teens invent their own communication language. The challenge of this communication is the difficulty of translation and that of being understood. Often these posts are hard to decode. A recent article by The New Media Consortium; describes these signals, “As more people participate in these kinds of communications, signals that were developed to add context to text-based messages, like smileys (☺) and tags (like <rant> </rant>), are slipping into the mainstream.” (The New Media Consortium, p 4, 2007). As these young consumers’ are developing the need for independence it is also positioning them to become dependant on online communication technologies as reported by Pew Internet on a teenage girl.

“It sounds stupid and everything but like once you like get into it it’s really like addicting – just like everything. Like you have your song and like you write like all this stuff about yourself and like all my friends basically have it. So like we always like read each other’s pages and like call each other and like kind of, and like you put like 300 pictures up so . . . people’s pictures and stuff and comments.” 9/10th Grade Girl, Midwestern City (Pew Internet, p 1 ).

As teens progress away from this site they will seek out other social networking sites for further exploration and navigate towards sites like Facebook. Furthermore, as communication continues to evolve on these networking sites they will continue to attract a substantial number of members and it is these user’s attitudes towards communication that will remain as a focus.

Facebook is similar to Bebo but directed at an audience of adults. As well as sharing information and photographs, there are an endless number of applications you can add to your page allowing you to take quizzes, ‘buy’ gifts for friends and recently Farmville. This application is designed to get the user to “attend” to your farm whilst communicating with your neighbour. If a user does not log on and attend to his farm his crop will die off, therefore user’s are ‘farming’ for hours on end and user’s are becoming addicted with application. An article in Scientific American Mind, Facebook was the main discussion focus where a guy named Steve is letting everyone know his daily, if not hourly, updates into his life. The article continues on describing how his Facebook pages is littered with entries like “Just finished my java mochaccino and about to walk Schnooker” and “Lost recipe for my scrumptious caramel fudge cake … super bummed … sigh”. Steve’s entries in Facebook, however indicates the type of conversion you have throughout the day and disregard as comments, a person’s thoughts, rather then a conversation, or more importantly communication where the receiver deems worthy of a response which is in this case superficial thoughts. The Internet has always provided a loose forum for the like-minded to congregate, but social networking contributes considerable structure to the chaos, allowing people to communicate more consistently and vigorously than ever before. (DiSalvo, D p1, 2010). Social networking sites are built on the base of superficial “friendships” with many individuals driven by communication between friends.

Technology advances at such an accelerated pace it can be difficult to be at the forefront of technology and its inner workings, especially if you are new to the game. The transitioning period has hardly been noticeable as we have progressed from email to chat to blogs to social networks and more recently to Twitter. Twitter is a popular micro-blogging platform in which you send messages (tweets) to friends, family and colleagues. “This fairly new method of communication has taken off in the last few years.

“What started out as a fun way for teens to share information with friends and network with people from other geographic areas has officially gone to the next level. According to the Nielson Survey Twitter has grown 37,000 percent from the previous year” (Communication through Social Networking, 2009).

Social networking sites like Twitter is primarily altering the social dynamic by complicating the way in which people communicate. Starting a conversation on Twitter is much the same as starting a conversation in real life. The most obvious difference is you need to communicate in 140 characters or less. With such a constrictive limit you need to be short and concise, unfortunately this also means that conversation are restricted, undescriptive and often can be open to misunderstanding where opportunities for mis-interpretation will multiply.

This is indicated by Fawkes and Gregory by stating “its reach is limitless, is not time-bound, it can be accessed when the user wishes; and it is capable of providing communication channels on a vast scale” (Fawkes & Gregory, p114, 2000). The bounding forces of social networking sites like Twitter sees the user’s interactions are often peculiar to newcomers who get frustrated when their intended message is not what is interpreted. As Twitter’s popularity has grown there are people spending all day twittering and are showing signs of twitter addiction. “Twitter has been described as fun, trivial, innovative, addictive, a waste of time, and potentially a powerful social networking tool; but its implications for teaching, learning and creative expression, if any, are not yet fully understood”(The New Media Consortium, p4, 2007) With the use of traditional computers individuals were not always able to communicate instantaneous, but used in connection with mobile phones the gap is eliminated thus there has been an increase of chatting and twittering on mobiles, resulting that Twitter’s feature of integration with mobile networks allows updates to be sent to hand held devices thus allowing users constant contact with the Twitter network giving them real time consumption which is what people are craving (Keenan,A, Shiri, A, p 11 ,2009). The phenomenon of quick updates has been dubbed as micro-blogging and this simplicity assists in messages delivered directly to you device. “Twitter is quick, direct and multi-modal. In an era when sites like Facebook and MySpace seem to have the social web covered, a simplified service like Twitter offers a unique alternative” (The New Media Consortium, p 6, 2007). It is ironic that social networking sites, which are designed to keep you in touch with friends, could potentially cause user’s to become addicted and therefore, could actually alienate an individual. The problem is that the virtual world in which social networking sites operates is not the same as the real world. It has the potential to take the user from social networking to social dysfunction. “These people are ignoring their children, their jobs, their “real” life, in favour of the social networking site. These “addicts” note how wonderful this virtual world can be and how people tend to put their best face forward” (CNN Health.com p1, 2009). By putting your best face forward, your communication therefore may not be as genuine and mis-interpretation could happen, therefore social networking sites are not an effective form of communication.

The communication game has changed again in the form of Second Life. Second Life enables its users to interact with each other through avatars, which are named residents, Second Life is for people aged 18 and over, while Teen Second Life is for people aged 13 to 17. Communication on Second Life is conducted through avatars via local chat or global instant messaging. Conversation between avatars is public and is visible to any other avatar with a given distance. Instant messaging is used for private conversations either between two avatars, or among the members of a group, or even between objects and avatars. Instant messages may also be sent to a persons email when the resident is logged off; this message is also saved and viewed when users log on. This instant saving of conversations is evident that communication of the destruction of face to face conversations, where they are stated then discarded. If a message is sent to an offline resident it will also be saved to be viewed when they log on. Recently Amazon Web Services began with a new communication medium on Second Life by conducting its first conference. This communication method will have people developing new communication methods that will have people wanting to explore, with this new communication medium comes new rules and possibilities.

Social networking sites have complicated the way in which we communicate to each other through the evolution of new forms of digital communications. To be able to expedite this technology into our fast paced lives, our time budgets have become reorganized to include these new communication forums. If this reorganization is not monitored, it can cause addiction. Social networking sites have created a completely different way of communicating and communication in the future will ultimately become the focus on the user’s ability of transitioning from one form to another that will sustain the essence of communication. For many young people interpretation and communicating this way is already second nature.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“Communication Through Social Networking”. (2009), Viewed 30^th March 2010

www.articlesbase.com/internet-articles/communication-through-social-networking-1127946.html

Di Salvo, (2010) “Are Social Networks Messing With Your Head?” Scientific American Mind; January / February 2010; Viewed 30th March 2010

Dudley, E, (2009) “Lines of Communication”, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 41(3), Sage Publications, Viewed 24^th April 2010

http://lis.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/cgi/reprint/41/3/131

Dunne, A, Lawlor, M, Rowley, J (2010) “Young people’s use of online social networking sites – a uses and gratifications perspective”, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, V:4,1, p,46 Emerald Group Publishing Limited , Viewed 30^th March 2010 www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/3250040103.pdf

“Five clues that you are addicted to Facebook” CNN Health.com , Viewed 26^th March 2010

www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/04/23/ep.facebook.addict/index.html

Fawkes, J, Gregory, A, (2000) “Applying communication theories to the Internet”, Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2000, pp. 109±124, Viewed 25^th March 2010 http://www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/3070050201.pdf

Israelsen, A, (2005) “Internet communication, Library Hi Tech News, p6-8 Number 7, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Viewed, 24^th April 2010

http://www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/2390220702.pdf

Jenny (2009), “Social dysfunction of media and its solution” Blog , Viewed 30^th March 2010

http://www.mysocialnetwork.net/blog09/566/GR9/2009/02/social-dysfunction-of-media-and-its-solution.html

Keenan, A, Ali, Shiri (2009) “Sociability and social interaction on social networking websites” Journal:Library Review, V,58, 6, P,438 – 45,Emerald Group Publishing Limited , Viewed 25^th March 2010 www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/0350580605.pdf

Kybernetes,. “Psychology of the Internet: research and theory”,V, 28, I5, Viewed 24^th April 2010

http://www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=NonArticle&Filename=Published/NonArticle/Articles/06728eaa.010.htm

Livingstone, S (2008), “Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation:teenager’s use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression, New Media Society p 1-20,Volu10(3), Viewed 24^th April 2010

http://nms.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/cgi/reprint/10/3/393

Patchin, J, Hinduja,S (2010),”Trends in online social networking: adolescent use of MYSpace over time, New Media & Society, vol;12(2) 197-216, Sage Publications, Viewed 24^th April 2010trends of social

http://nms.sagepub.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/cgi/reprint/12/2/197

The New Media Consortium, (2007) “Social Networking, the “Third Place,” and the Evolution of Communication” Viewed 26^th March 2010

www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/

Willet, R (2009), “As soon as you get on Bebo you just go mad” Young Consumers: Insight and Ideas for Responsible Marketers, V, 10, 4, P,283 – 296, Emerald Group Publishing Limited , Viewed 26^th March 2010 http://www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/3210100402.pdf

Young, K (2004) “Internet addiction” AMERICAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST, Vol. 48 No. 4, Sage Publications, Viewed 24^th April 2010

http://www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/0350570503.pdf

Vitak,J,(2008) “New Communication technologies’ impact on young adults, Viewed 24^th April 2010

www.pewinternet.org/Commentary/2008/May/New-communication-technologies-impact-on-young-adults.aspx

Social Networks communication, Facebook, Social Networking, social networking sites, twitter

Edit in Admin

Comments

Written by Masters of Media » John Doe is addicted to Twitter about 2 years ago.

[...] http://networkconference.netstudies.org/2010/05/the-addictive-nature-of-social-networking-sites-has-…, last accessed on [...]
Written by reneeh about 2 years ago.

Hi Jo
Thanks for your views, you say that you believe that there is no difference between nonverbal communication eg letters. In my experience when writing a letter or email it has a similiar structure of a formal style and content, yet Twitter encourages uses to shorten words to as few characters as possible, the same as email. As a result there are some students who are applying this methd into their schoolwork. “And while they do not think their use of computers or their text-based communications with friends influences their formal writing, many do admit that the informal styles that characterize their e-communications do occasionally bleed into their schoolwork”. Will this cross over from casual to formal become a snowball effect, until it is an accepted form of communication?

Teens do not consider a lot of their electronic texts as writing
http://www.pewinternet.org/Press-Releases/2008/Teens-do-not-consider-a-lot-of-their-electronic-texts-as-writing.aspx
Written by reneeh about 2 years ago.

I totally agree with you Cathy that teenagers are addicted to SNS, there sense of needing to belong and be accepted by everyone. This table is describing the gratification young teens are seeking and the gratification they receive by using SNS

Gratifications sought Gratifications obtained
Communication Portraying one’s ideal image
Friending Peer acceptance
Identity creation and management Relationship maintenance
Entertainment Safety from embarrassment and rejection
Escapism and alleviation of boredom Engaging in playground politics
Information search
Interacting with boys
Table I.
Gratifications sought
and obtained
A ine Dunne and Margaret-Anne Lawlor “Young people’s use of online social networking sites – a uses and gratifications perspective”
http://www.emeraldinsight.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jspcontentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/3250040103.pdf
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Clyde A,

I’d agree with you that my personal opinion is entirely subjective. Some clarification though – my experience is with my daughter’s circle of friends (who surprisingly have ‘friended’ me). They are high school students – across a broad spectrum of academic ability. I haven’t done any long term research on this – but I have seen it often and regularly enough for it to have impacted on my opinion of their written communication skills (positively)
I acknowledge that my comments were taking the whole issue of communication on SNSs in a different direction to Reneeh’s paper – as the paper was looking particularly at the connection between addictive online behaviour and communication. I was trying to show a different aspect to the communication issue. In regards to the references I gave showing how SNS have improved communication skills – I believe that this is one of those controversial subjects where you are going to have strong opinions on either side. Even with experts (such as danah boyd) at times promoting different opinions. You make a good point about including in the issue of communicating – identity -and I would agree that a lot of young people certainly have significant problems with this (as seen in your quote from danah boyd). My take on the whole issue of communication and the Internet in general is to approach it from a positive angle (especially as a parent and as a Library professional), where I have the opportunity to teach, encourage and prepare youth in regards to their participation and communication on SNSs.

Cheers,
KayeE
Written by RosannaCandler about 2 years ago.

Hi Sharlene,

I have to say I disagree with your statement above. Just because the definition of social networking can be seen as an evolutionary step, as a “new type of medium that society will adjust to” does not make it in any way “simple” or indeed any less of a risk. After all, junk food was once a ‘new kind of food’ which became increasingly popular and assimilated into many western societies- and now we find ourselves in the very serious predicament of obesity epidemics with the Australian Health Department pointing the finger (among other elements) at this cheap, high fast and high sugar food. As proof of this harm, we have the government’s preventative health policy- which is piling money into trying to control these food industries’ advertising (Metherell, 2010)

What I am trying to say with this analogy is that yes, new things are often adjusted an accepted by society- but this does not mean it cannot or does not have the potential to be incredibly damaging.

Metherell, M. (2010) Labor fails to tackle alcohol and junk food giants. The Age, http://www.theage.com.au/national/labor-fails-to-tackle-alcohol-and-junkfood-giants-20100512-uy42.html Retrieved May 15th 2010
Written by Emily about 2 years ago.

A really interesting paper. Because the online mediums that you have discussed are becoming more and more integrated with our everyday lives, it’s inevitable that they will have an effect on the way we conduct ‘real life’ communication. One quite interesting experience that is occurring increasingly often is that I’ll start talking to a friend or family member (over the phone or face-to-face) about something that’s happening in their life, and they’ll display surprise that I know about it – despite the fact that they posted it on Facebook, for everyone to see. In this way, perhaps social networking IS having a detrimental affect on the way we traditionally communicate.

However, I’m not convinced that it’s all bad. For example, isn’t an addiction to a social networking site, where you’re still communicating and interacting with your friends online, better than an addiction to say, an online game, where you only interact with stranger’s online avatars? You also mention the “devastating effect social networking sites have on the transitioning of “slang” into the everyday dealings with face to face communication” – in my opinion, slang isn’t particularly damaging to communication between individuals, as long as both people are familiar with the particular slang being used. Slang, after all, is a continually evolving aspect of language that’s been used since ancient times ¹.

Great paper! I enjoyed reading it.

¹ Grey (2007). Slang: Where it Came from and Why It’s Cool. Retrieved May 15, 2010, from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/204936/slang_where_it_came_from_and_why_its.html?cat=9
Written by Clyde A about 2 years ago.

Hi Renee,
Congratulations on tackling this topic ‘head on’, notwithstanding that your intended audience is a university audience which mostly consists of SNS converts, your article is really well written with many ‘home truths’ that young adults will deny – at least until they turn 30.

I definitely agree that offline communication has spiraled downwards as a result of SNSs; my experience in the workplace has shown that many young people’s written communication is in the abbreviated format of online chat. Now this would be beneficial if, as JoG points out, they were conveying the information in a twitter conversation, but these examples are in a law firm, and the consequences are a loss of income when the client decides to use another lawyer based on their lack of confidence in communication ability. This is the point of the argument, the inability of many users to revert from SNS like ‘twitter-land’, back to reality.

Another area where I have witnessed first-hand the negative impact of social networking relates to criticism. It is evident to me in the workplace, that many young people (especially westerners) today are unable to accept or cope with criticism in any form; among other reasons, I believe this also may be related to the agreeable online virtual utopia constructed by SNSs.

I think KayeE misses the point about communication, of course there are going to be subjective experiences like hers, where her circle of friends (university students?) corrects each other’s grammar, but that is not truly representative of the SNS community, take for example my son’s Facebook communications, where in an experiment I carried out in the past hour, not one of the other users pointed out errors that I asked him to deliberately type.

While KayeE comments that danah boyd and other scholars have articles showing how SNS have improved communication skills, I would argue that it is not only the ability to type a communicative message that is important, but their inability to communicate identity, which has become confused as a direct result of online social networking, take for example this excerpt from danah boyd in her dissertation Taken Out of Context:
“As rich as her profile is, it is hard to place Allie. Her self-description reveals some angst, but she is glowing in her photograph. Her self-description has stayed the same for months, making it difficult for me to sense change. I can gather from her five blog posts over two years that she is struggling to make sense of her religion, but I have no idea how pervasive these thoughts are in her daily life nor can I tell why this is the only topic that she seems to post about. I can see whom she lists as Friends, but I have no idea how she feels about these people or those she spends time with who are not on MySpace. Her profile is public, which makes it possible for me to see, but I have only the slightest idea of whom she intends to view it. For all that is revealed, there is much more that is not.” (boyd, 2008, p. 133)

It is this confused and constructed (hoped-for?) identity, coupled with the ‘dumbed down’ communicative methods used in SNS – especially twitter, that is continuing to affect young people in everyday life – in the real world.

Boyd, D. (2008). Taken Out of Context. University of California, Berkeley.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Reneeh – Thanks for your paper – it has made me think and explore whether I think that communication has spiralled downwards because of social networking sites. I must admit that I don’t think that it has. For me there are two issues here – communication in terms of literacy and new media and also communication in everyday life.

In regards to communication and literacy, my own experience with Social Networking sites in this regard is that it expands my communication skills. I have to think about what I want to communicate and how I want to communicate. Participating on Social Networks also allows me to critically think and engage in what other people comment on, allowing me to develop appropriate communication skills. In fact I often witness on Facebook people who correct and comment on other people’s grammar and spelling – in a helpful and positive way. I recently read an article by Jenkins, Purushotma, Weigel, Clintn & Robinson on media culture and education in the 21st century. They make a very significant statement and approach communication and new media in a positive way,

“We have developed an integrated approach to media pedagogy founded on exercises that introduce youths to core technical skills and cultural competencies, exemplars that teach
youths to critically analyze existing media texts, expressions that encourage youths to create new media content, and ethics that encourage youths to critically reflect on the consequences of their own choices as media makers”.

I think that we can influence the way that people (especially young people still in education) can use Social Networking in a positive, learning environment, where communication is taught and encouraged. Social networking is not going away in the near future and we need to work with it not against it.

The second issue I see is communication in terms of everyday life. I would have like to have seen some more references on this in your paper and especially how it has negatively affected people in their daily lives. You did well to reference addiction and time that people spent on these sites, but I saw no connection with how this is playing out in their lives. I have done some research and found the following articles which say that Social Networking sites have improved peoples communication skills:

Williams, S (2008). Study: Facebook improves communication skills. Retrieved May 15th, 2010 from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2008/08/06/study_facebook_improves_commun.aspx

boyd, D. (2007). Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
Available: http://www.danah.org/papers/WhyYouthHeart.pdf

Lee, L. (2002). Enhancing Learners’ Communication Skills through Synchronous Electronic Interaction and Task-Based Instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 35(1), 16-24.

Valkenburg, P., Peter, J (2007). Preadolescents’ and adolescents’ online communication and their closeness to friends. Developmental Psychology. Vol 43(2), 267-277.

In text Reference:

Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K. & Robison, A.J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: media education for the 21st century. Cambridge & London: MIT Press. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/Confronting_the_Challenges.pdf
Written by JoG about 2 years ago.

Hi Renee,

I think that the asynchronous nature of online communication is no different from other non-verbal forms of communication whether it be letters or telegrams. It is interesting to note that some people have drawn the analogy between the telegram and Twitter (e.g. Standage, 2009). Twittering is seen to be similar to sending telegraph messages as these messages needed to be brief because of the cost involved in sending them. Abbreviations were also developed for this reason. Although there is a distinct difference in the type of information conveyed by Twitter and its intended audience, the brevity of form and the use of abbreviation is similar. History shows that the wide use of telegrams did not change our use of language or our ability to communicate face to face but was seen as a separate way to communicate a message. People at that time were able to successfully transition from one form of communication to another and, I believe we are equally able to do today. As you mentioned in your paper “for many young people interpretation and communicating this way is already second nature.”

Thanks for the interesting topic you presented,
Jo

Standage, T. (2009). Twitter = telegram 3.0, sort of. Retrieved May 14, 2010 from tomstandage.wordpress.com/2009/01/…/twitter-telegram-30-sort-of/
Written by Cathy Brzeski about 2 years ago.

This is a very important issue. However i don’t think its a new one, technology addiction and internet addiction is not a recent development in my opinion.

What i find interesting is that the category of ‘technology’ addiction is becoming more and more broad. We now have gaming addictions, SNSs addictions, Instant Messaging Addictions etc.

You have explored teen addiction in relation to social networking sites. Its definitely a popular trend. I believe the reason teens are so addicted and attracted to SNSs is because it has a connection to their self esteem, the way they portray themselves to peers, and how they feel about themselves. Teenage hood can be a very confusing time as we have all experienced. Whats fascinating these days is that insecurities, identity issues, cravings for popularity etc can all be addressed via. social networking sites rather then dealt with in real life.
Written by craigj about 2 years ago.

Hey reneeh,
I found this and included it in my paper.

With our work and family demands increasing, we are finding it harder to prioritise our lives and the excessive demands with a fast paced and high demanding society (Voydanoff, 1988, p. 749). Having the option of communicating asynchronously has allowed users to communicate at a time that best suits them. Social networking services have given rise to a new form of leisure built around talking, sharing, and providing opinions and perspectives (marketingcharts.com, 2009).

Ref:

marketingcharts.com (2009). Social Networking Grows 93%; Communication Becomes Entertainment Retrieved March 2010, 2010, from http://www.marketingcharts.com/interactive/social-networking-grows-93-communication-becomes-entertainment-8576/

Voydanoff, P. (1988). Work Role Characteristics, Family Structure Demands, and Work / Family Conflict. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50(3), 749-761.
Written by Sharlene about 2 years ago.

I also find it interesting with the definition of communcation that it states that it is the “process of sharing ideas, information, and messages with other in a particular time and place” (Israelsen, A, p2, 2005). Doesn’t that mean that social networking sites are simply just a new type of medium that society will adjust to and will not facilitate in a downward spiral of communication.

I think that most social networking sites allow users to communicate in lengthly characters except for Twitter whose purpose was to communicate messages in 140 characters or less. This may result in more slang, although I also think it is very dependant on what the objective of the user is and what they are trying to convey. Retweeting with Twitter allows for interesting information to be sent out again to other audiences, which can act as a type of flitering of information on relevant and interesting topics.

People might argue that when SMS was introduced it was going to destroy communication and people would become addicted, although as time passes it always seems that people simply adjust to new technologies and a majority of the population come to embrace it.
Written by JasonK about 2 years ago.

Your paper presents some interesting topics from the idea that SNS’s affect language and introduce slang into everyday face to face dealings as well as the idea of Internet addiction.

I have to disagree with your primary argument that communication on SNS’s has had a profound negative impact on language use in daily face to face life with the introduction of slang. You argue that the Internet and communication via SNS’s is single handedly responsible for the introduction of slang into normal everyday conversation yet you are not able to provide any credible evidence to support such an argument. Even if this is true, you neglect the fact that the English language and all languages are constantly evolving and changing. The Linguistic Society of America (n.d) has this to say regarding the changing of language,

“Language is always changing, evolving, and adapting to the needs of its users. This isn’t a bad thing; if English hadn’t changed since, say, 1950, we couldn’t have words to refer to modems, fax machines, or cable TV. As long as the needs of language users continue to change, so will the language.”

People change language to suite their needs. Slang has been around as long as the English language. Your argument unfortunately is not specific enough as it does not say what type of slang is being introduced nor are you able to provide any reference to support that this is a bad thing.

I agree with your other point that Internet addiction is a true phenomena as it has been discussed widely dating back to 1999 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/460208.stm). However your assumption that the Internet is the cause of people becoming addicted is not proven. There have always been people who suffer from addictive personality disorder. According to Mason (2009) approximately 10 to 15 percent of the entire population of the planet has an addictive personality. 10 to 15 percent of the entire population of the planet is approx 900 million people. If these people use the Internet we can safely assume that there is a real possibility they will become addicted. But you cannot say that the Internet caused their addiction. The argument you present regarding Internet addiction and its causes is not proven and is not explained properly.

Your paper presents interesting points but they need to be explored further and supported.

Is English Changing. American Linguistic Society. Retrieved from http://www.lsadc.org/info/pdf_files/Is_English_Changing.pdf

Mason, S. (2009). The addictive personality. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/look-it-way/200903/the-addictive-personality
Written by jhiroberts about 2 years ago.

Hi Renee,

Interesting paper,

I have a few friends who i think suffer from Social Networking addiction. Making 5-10 updates to their Facebook status per day.

Its quite frightening to think of the social implications Social Networking can have, I do use Social networking quite a lot, however I like to give myself a time frame each day as you can easily get sucked into spending hours participating.

I agree with BromwichR comments about how every new form of communication, is portrayed as being the death of face – to – face communication. I guess time will tell if Social Networking is just that.

Thanks for a great read.

Jhi

http://networkconference.netstudies.org/2010/04/facebook-and-the-demise-of-individual-privacy-%E2%80%93-a-flawed-assumption-or-serial-disregard/
Written by keithlaw about 2 years ago.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e335/jvitak/communicationmethodschart-1-1.jpg

I wanted to display this graph from the website for the first citation.
Written by keithlaw about 2 years ago.

(Vitak, 2008)
“This research was facilitated by a survey of 644 Georgetown undergraduates on their uses of various communication technologies, and especially the internet, in keeping connected with others.” (Vitak, 2008)
Vitak concludes:” But what does this finding have to do with writing? The younger respondents in my survey tend to spend more time each day interacting with others via communication methods that encourage text shortcuts such as abbreviations, acronyms and emoticons. Therefore, these ways of typing — being more ingrained in younger users’ minds — are probably more likely to bleed over into their more formal writing than among upperclassmen. In the college environment, however, these students are unlikely to find sympathy from their professors if such informal writing styles appear in their midterms and exams. Likewise, these students may have learned in high school about separating their formal and informal writing and do not allow the informal styles discussed in the Pew report to appear in their collegiate writing.” (Vitak, 2008)
This research which you cited does not support your proposition. You have not established that “a downward spiral of communication skills” exists and certainly the above study does not imply social networking sites to be the stimulus for such a downward spiral. I think it very likely that people adapt their communication skills to the environment such as this study concludes high school students separating their formal and informal writing.
There has always been criticism of the language skills of the younger generations. Perhaps language and communications skills improve with maturity and experience and we tend to overstate the skills of past generations.
I find the quote of the “like” girl to be selective and almost satirical. The use of these types of language cannot be blamed on the Internet as I’m sure they don’t type in those “likes” on Facebook and Twitter.

WORKS CITED
Vitak, J. (2008, May 15). New communication technologies’ impact on young adults. Retrieved May 9, 2010, from Pew Internet: http://www.pewinternet.org/Commentary/2008/May/New-communication-technologies-impact-on-young-adults.aspx
Written by BromwichR about 2 years ago.

Interesting paper Renee – every communications breakthrough has altered hiw community has interacted from the printing press to radio, TV to online. Seems that with every substantive change the cries of poor communication skills have arisen, sometimes true, sometimes not. Will be interesting to see how the online revolution, inlcuding social networks described in this paper, fully impact on communications skills of the “online natives” to the old fogies of the print world.
Written by CarolynS about 2 years ago.

Hi Renee,

Interesting paper! You have stated that Social Networking Sites have evolved from early online chat, but that today’s social networking sites such as Second Life are having a detrimental affect on communications. A definition of Second Life states “At it’s most basic, Second Life is a graphics enhanced mega chat room. You have all of the capabilities you have in a normal chat room, public messages, private messages, and group messenging. Only in SL you have the added bonus of a visual to go along with the text.” (Squidoo, n.d.) Personally I would think that the added advantage of having the visuals and the ability to send ‘offline messages’ (saved until the user comes online) would be beneficial to communications.

Would you argue then that problems starts back in the early days of the internet and the first chat rooms?

Also, I think applications such as Second Life can add other advantages to communications, such as how a professor can hold a real time lecture for students all over the world, or a couple who have been separated for work commitments can still interact. It can also help people who usually shy away from ‘normal’ interaction due to race, gender or faith, communicate more freely and find likeminded people.

Carolyn.

Squidoo, (n.d.) Second Life: What’s the Point?, Retrieved May 9 2010, from http://www.squidoo.com/secondlifetodo
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Good paper, just would have liked to have seen a formal definition of addiction or internet addiction but that is splitting hairs, the points you made about Twitter are quite good and are a paper in itself. I wonder what it is that makes 140 characters so addictive given that it is not the type of medium like Facebook or a chat line where gratification is more instant because you can say more. Maybe.