Good morning, afternoon, and evening to you all, this is Kris Canlas communicating to you through an asynchronous medium over the internet. *gasp!* I'm a senior Biology major with a concentration in Animal Physiology in CALS, and also a member of The Chordials, co-ed a-cappella group.
One phenomenon that has swept campuses and countries all over the world is text messaging. It is an asynchronous form of messaging facilitated by the use of cell phones, and allows people to send messages a few sentences long to others in a matter of seconds. One can check these messages at any time, day or night, at their convenience, and respond to them in a similar fashion. Do people send text messages because they are cheap and lazy, or economical and efficient? My ex-boyfriend used to hate talking on the phone, and would either communicate with me in person, or go about getting his point across in a succinct text message. To him, it was either communicate properly, or barely do it at all. Whether to our benefit or demise, this form of 'bare communication' is now endemic to nations worldwide. Text messaging lacks the warmth and realness that comes with speaking to someone in person, or even on the phone, and creates dialogue that is limited in complexity and sophistication. We even text-messaged each other after the relationship had ended, when I didn't want to hear the sound of his obnoxious voice, and text messaging was as good as poking him with a stick.
Texting, however, can be viewed as a positive technological innovation for its efficiency and economical nature. Just ask one of 10 million cell phone owners in the Philippines, the "texting capital of the world". An article in The Mercury News of San Jose, California, says that text messaging in the Philippines "isn't just a craze, it's a way of life. This country's 80 million people send 160 million cell phone messages a day." Companies don't offer the myriad of 'free' minutes that we Americans take for granted, so texting is an inexpensive way to chat. Each message costs approximately 1 peso (50P ~ $1). In a country that has a 70% poverty rate, it's not surprising that this method of communication is so popular. Text messaging is used by everyone from cab drivers to corporate executives, and is even popular with the country's president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (Boston Globe). It provides a means to be connected to loved ones anywhere at any time, and with diligence, entire conversations can be carried on by this frugal means.
When economic situations are varied, texting can be a salient form of communication, or a brief and easy way of getting one's point across. In the case of natives of the Philippines, talking to your friends and family via text is an easy way to get around paying enormous bills. However, if verbal communication is a practical option, as it is in the US, it would be better to pick up the phone to call Mom if you really wanted to touch base with her.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Hi Kristina -
Having many family members from the Philippines, I always wondered why they choose texting as their primary means of communication. It was not until I visited two summers ago that I realized how much more expensive it is to purchase a SIM card than to just send text messages. I can't remember the actual titles of the movies, but pretty much every Filipino chick flick out two years ago focused on the text phenomenon. Interesting, huh? Anyway, I totally agree with your statement that text messaging lacks the warmth and realness that comes with speaking to someone in person, or even on the phone, and creates dialogue that is limited in complexity and sophistication. One thing you might want to think about though, in terms of realness (honesty), is the possibility of people saying things in text messages that they don't have the guts to say in person. In this case, eliminating awkward physical confrontation may sometimes encourage realness through text messaging.
Hey Kristina!! In the past I never saw what the big deal was with text messaging. My brother, who is now 18, used to text message all the time a couple years ago and I would make fun of him for always having his phone out texting his friends. It wasn't until I got to college that I realized just how helpful this technology is. Whether communicating with friends from high school or texting people to see what time dinner was, I began to replace phone conversations with texts. As a form of asynchronous communication, it makes communication more efficient by allowing a focus on what is necessary not available on the phone. Now, even my father sees the wonders of text and talks to me in this way when he needs something specific. I believe that soon texting will overcome talking as the most popular means of communication.
Texting = the best, worst, most and least convenient mode of communication there ever was, ever. I love it for its ease, simplicity, subtlety and asynchronousity. I hate it for its lack of personality, lack of emotion, lack of undertone and lack of cues. The funny thing about texting is that it is exactly this ambiguity that makes it so special.
Have a crush on someone and want to see what they’re up to (without looking like you’re trying too hard by calling)? Text. Want to be succinct with someone you need information from but would rather not sit and chat? Text. How about the situation in which you just need a phone number or password, but are in the middle of class or a meeting? Text. It is a universal solution for our preference to maintain a certain level of reserve or detachment.
I, too, had a black-or-white boyfriend: real-life communication or text/instant-message/e-mail. He didn’t have much patience for phone chatting, leading us toward both entertaining text conversations and stressful miscommunications. While, in texting, I always anticipated a clever response and a chance to occupy bored fingers, I found myself offended more than once by a lack of warmth I would somehow perceive. Whose fault was this? His, for forgoing the warm conversational cues I was used to? Or mine, for not expecting that those were just naturally implied?
The line is fine between succinct and offensive, and it takes a nuanced texter to achieve such a balance. In my own eyes, I may just have found it. Who knows, though. Ask my next boyfriend?
Hello Kris,
I agree with many of the points you mention. However, there is much more to text messaging. Personally, I believe the text messaging trend to be a generational phenomenon. It seems as though a majority of those “obsessed” with text messaging are in their teens and twenties. It is not often that you see those over 40 years old text messaging at all times of the day. Teenagers (such as myself) have come to rely on this source of communication keep in touch with friends, and even have “secret” conversations that would otherwise not be said in person or face-to-face. Though this mode of communication is arguably convenient, there are definitely a few drawbacks. For instance, because the messages are delivered in text format, it can be difficult determining the tone. A simple “I’m fine.” may have positive or negative undertones. If misinterpreted, many problems could arise. Also, there is definitely lag between messages. In the time it takes to have a lengthy verbal conversation with a person, only a handful of short messages may be exchanged. I definitely believe this craze will continue to grow in time, despite its drawbacks (because, let’s face it, how many teenagers actually think about the technical and psychological meaning of text messaging?!). Let’s hope parents get used to paying those outrageously expensive phone bills!
Post a Comment