Text Messaging: Addiction, Withdrawal, and Social Evolution

The New York Times just published an article covering an experiment at a New York high school, in which half the student body stopped texting for two days.  The article lauded the results, which included students finishing homework faster, and having time to spend with their parents.  It also suggested that texting somehow gets in the way of normal social development, by making it too easy for students to communicate without having to actually face their peers.  Here's the article: Encouraging the Text Generation to Rediscover Its Voice.  I think the Times got it wrong.

To be sure, this brave new world of electronic communication brings its own perils.  Another study showed that when a person is distracted by instant messaging, their IQ is effectively lowered more than it would be by smoking marijuana.  In other words, potheads can concentrate better than texters.  That's ominous news for the army of suits working downtown, who are unable to put down their blackberries and iphones.  I remember from personal experience that when I had a blackberry and worked for a dot-com, the best part of the day was when I turned the damn thing off in the evening.

That being said, I think there's too much of a rush to dismiss the new technology as evil.  On the contrary, I think electronic communication is fostering a new type of social awareness.  This takes several forms.

First is the ability to get back in touch with old friends and acquaintances.  I've got over 200 friends on Facebook.  It's been a long time since I've talked with most of these people, such as my very first girlfriend when I was 13 years old.  To be sure, I could always write her a letter and put it in the mail (remember that?).  But if I happen to find myself wondering, "what happened to Celine?", I can simply log on and see what she's up to.  (I think it has something to do with being a gourmet chef.  If I wanted to know more, I'd write her an actual letter.)  Does this somehow cheapen the relationship?  Does it put up a barrier to actual contact?  I don't think so.  On the contrary, I've reconnected with people for whom I have no mailing address or phone number.

Next is the ability to feel connected.  Many of my friends--I mean my close friends, the ones I care about--post regular updates using sites like Facebook or Twitter.  I know, for example, that several of my friends recently did charity walks or ran in a half-marathon.  I congratulated each of them on a job well done.  Sure, this same exchange could have been done with a letter in the mail, but I challenge you to explain to me how that's objectively better.  Besides, when was the last time you sat down and wrote a letter: "Dear Friend: I just ran a half marathon in 21 minutes!"  By reducing the barriers to communication, the information we share with friends becomes richer and more personal.

Third, communication has ceased to become a task, and is simply a way of life.  I don't have to sit down to read email any more.  It's something that just happens as the day progresses.  My smart phone lets me know I've received a new email, and if I'm not doing something more important, I glance down to see what it is.  Same with texts and instant messages.  Communication is something that is no longer limited to certain times or places.

This is where my rant gets weird.  It strikes me that this level of consciousness is something that was foretold in science fiction or fantasy.  Think of stories about aliens who could communicate with each other instantly, no matter where they were, without opening their mouths.  Or wizards who could use magical artifacts to instantly communicate with other wizards, thousands of miles away--not just verbal messages, but also images and feelings.

But aren't we there now?  Isn't that exactly what smartphones are already doing?  There is a layer of reality that cannot be seen, heard, or felt, except through small devices we carry with us everywhere.  This concept has been extended through a new form of technology called augmented reality, in which your phone can tell you things like the direction of the nearest bar, or the Wikipedia article on that famous landmark you're staring at.  Not to mention the wealth of the internet, which is instantly available anywhere, any time.  Having a conversation with friends when an unusual word comes up?  Debating what the word actually means?  I can quickly pull out my smartphone and check Dictionary.com, which simultaneously gives me the definitions from Miriam-Webster, the Oxford Unabridged, and the American Heritage dictionary.

But the point is not simply that information is available.  The point is, what is the value of that information?  And how do we use it?  I believe that social networking and instant electronic communication is bringing us together.

Of course, the elephant under the table is the addictive effect of electronic gadgets.  According to the Times article, college students who go without their devices begin to experience physical symptoms of withdrawal.  The answer, of course, is the same as it's ever been: all things in moderation.

If I'm out with friends, I don't need my smartphone because my friends are right there.  More importantly, it would be rude to interrupt a real conversation with a real person to read an instant message from someone who isn't there.  It's important to remember that you own the technology, and not the other way around.

There are also ways to turn off the fire hose, or at least lower the pressure.  At night, I still turn my phone off; I don't need to know that the new edition of the New York Times has landed in my email at 12:30 am.

It's also important to discriminate between different types of communication.  When you log on to an instant messenger, it indicates a desire to communicate with people online.  Text messages do not carry the same level of urgency.  If someone sends me a text asking where I'll be next weekend, I know I can take my time responding.

The most important test is whether you can prioritize your levels of reality appropriately.  Right now, as I sit here, I'm logged into five different instant messengers, with my email open and my cell phone sitting right next to me.  Not to mention my half-written blog post taking up most of the screen.  But if my wife wanted to say something to me, I'd wrench my eyes away from the various screens and focus on her.  Because, after all, that's what communication is all about.

So what's my bottom line?  It's that technology is not a bad thing, and it's not driving us apart.  In many important ways, all this new technology is actually bringing us together.  It's a new level of social awareness, and it's exciting and enriching at the same time.  To be sure, it brings its own dangers, but that's not a reason to abandon the technology.  Rather, it's a reason to approach this new paradigm with a careful, moderate, and mature attitude.  If you can do that, then you're in for something very, very cool.

J<