Isn't it peculiar how most of us suffer from a squinting morning disease? You know what I'm talking about. We are barely awake, haven't even turned around to bid a good morning to our partner but our smartphone is in hand and we are squinting through one eye at the useless information glaring at us from the little screen. I use the term useless information due to the fact that five minutes after we scanned through our Facebook, Twitter and news feeds, we actually wake up properly and can't recall anything that we read just a while back. (Better check again) Also, how useful is the information on Facebook really? I'm sure we would be just fine if we didn't know what our pseudo-friends were up to. Not that it matters anyway. How much could possibly have happened since we checked our phone before we went to bed last night?
We are living in an age of information overload and unfortunately with the increase in quantity the quality gets diminished. Not that most of us care. Our hunger for information has grown to the point where we will settle for anything (queue Facebook status updates) and in our hunger to 'know' we are becoming increasingly more disconnected while being more connected. Confused? Me too. Stephan Marche (2012:sp) explains that "we are loving in an isolation that would have been unimaginable to our ancestors, and yet we have never been more accessible". We are now always available, but to who? I find it highly irritating when visiting a restaurant and witnessing a couple or a group of friends sitting at a table with their noses buried in their smartphones. Everyone at the table is communicating with someone who is not actually present. I find this very strange. Let's get together so we can communicate with people who couldn't join us. Wait what? When I become president I am banning any digital communication device where two or more people are present. Marche (2012:sp) attempts to approach this phenomena from a psychological point of view in arguing that even though Facebook might encourage more contact with people outside of our household, it might come at the expense of the relationships in it. He explores the fact that this might be due to "unhappy family relationships in the first place" that we feel the need to connect to people outside of our close relationships.
A state of always being connected isn't necessarily simply linked to being social. Perlow (2012:2) explains that "always being on, in fact, is becoming increasingly core to our identities". Whether this is a good thing is definitely up for debate. We are willing to interrupt personal conversations in order to answer a ringing phone in our ever increasing need to be available. Sure, being available outside the confines of the office has definitely made our lives easier, not to mention the monetary rewards of being able to handle one's business from anywhere at any time. But does it come at a cost? The cost of personal, face to face social skills? The cost of being able to shut down and simply be by yourself? Perlow (2012:4) refers to "PTO" or "predictable time off" where we have the power to decide to not always be connected. In order to maintain a healthy relationship with the actual people around us and ourselves, we need to make time where we are unavailable. The problem is that we have become so obsessed with being connected that anxiety overcomes us if we accidentally leave our electronic communication devices at home. Perhaps I am generalising but it is certainly something i have observed and even experienced myself. Perlow (2012:7) explains that "by being constantly connected to work, [people seem] to be reinforcing - and worse, amplifying - the very pressures that caused them to need to be available".
Perhaps I have been a bit pessimistic till now. Engaging with the digital and being available isn't all bad. It is however important to manage the way in which we interact with the digital. Rheingold (2012:1) wants us to engage in a "mindful" manner although he believes that this does not happen automatically. Instead of simply consuming we need to engage and think of what we are doing and why. We need to accept that technology is an ally that if used correctly can be very beneficial on all accounts of our daily lives. But as Rheingold (2012:2) argues, it is "dangerously naïve" to believe that technology will be able to solve social problems that are caused by technology. We are social beings and interaction with human beings, especially on face to face value, should not become a casualty of technology.
The next time you are in a restaurant, switch off your phone and be present in the moment. Some things can wait till later. Have both eyes open when engaging with technology. I know I can quit my phone anytime I want to, just let me quickly answer this email.
No comments:
Post a Comment