Changing Social Interactions and Relationships, Essay Example

Communication and social interaction have been evolving in the course of history, since the pre-historic times when people could live their whole life and never know the neighboring tribe, to the times when individuals can communicate instantly with other people from the most distant corners of the world, exchange messages, share photos, and even communicate in the real-time regime due to the Internet video conferencing and video chat options. Historically, the changes in the communication processes, tools, and methods have brought about a tremendous change in the ways social interaction occurred. With the advent of mail and telephone were considered revolutionary, enabling people without direct proximity to each other to exchange messages; the Internet, in its turn, has made it possible to transmit messages instantly around the globe (“Module 2” 1; Tyler 195). However, there is still a question on whether the Internet affects the modes of communication and social interaction as strongly as it does with the communication speed.

As Shklowski, Kraut, and Rainie reported in 2004, 60% of the US households had a personal computer, and over 50% – access to the Internet (1). Statistics indicates that people mostly use the Internet for interpersonal communication; 85% of Internet users sent or received email. However, despite the commonplace expectations that such use of Internet would have a positive social impact, the statistics indicates that the Internet use decreases the social participation of people. Frequency of Internet use is more and more associated with depression and social isolation, and forgoing the time that can be spent with family and friends, attending social events, etc., for the sake of involving in online communication (Shklowski, Kraut, and Rainie 1).

In the age of the Internet, people having possibilities to be connected to virtually any person in the world still report feeling much more lonelier and isolated than they used to feel when the Internet was not in such widespread use (Sivyer 1). The present trend is explained by the fact that many people are attracted by the ability to create a false identity in the Web and to be perceived differently from who they are in reality. Hence, the self-perception of individuals is eroded, and they prefer to remain the personalities they have made up for themselves in the Internet rather than communicate with their community in their authentic form. This is what Louis Wirth called the “death of community” (“Community, Technology, and Changing Urban Places” 9). This problem has indeed changed the social relationships among people, with large groups of Internet users preferring the deceptive digital communication to real-life communication challenges, barriers, and conflicts.

Analyzing these trends, one can infer that the historical development of social interactions and social relationship has brought about a fundamental change of communication modes. People who received access to communication with the rest of the world prefer to chat with their friends from distant countries at the expense of spending time with their neighbors, friends, group-mates, and colleagues. The tendency to arrange networks of isolated individuals without the local community sensibilities is present, in large cities in particular. The rush of a metropolitan area, with few people knowing their neighbors’ names, dictates totally different rules for hearty and sensitive communication. It is often hard for people to find their co-thinkers, people who share their hobbies and understand their concerns, so they communicate online where the simple use of search engine will bring them to the community that suits them most.

Historically, people were not much more community-sensitive, since barriers in communication hindered and slowed it. In the Middle Ages, and even in the 18^th-19^th centuries, sending a letter to a relative might take several months to receive an answer, while common people having no money for messengers were urged to live in ignorance about their relatives’ fate, and could find anything out only from travelers, or should initiate a long-term journey themselves. The advent of telephone and telegraph speeded up the human communication, and made it possible for people to get in touch with each other in case of need. Hence, it is possible to conclude that the traditional modes of communication, such as telephone, telegraph, and regular mail, produced much less negative impact on people’s communication, enabling them to remain updated about their family’s and friends’ lives, and at the same time not substituting face-to-face communication. The Internet offering many tools for engaging in face-to-face instant communication brings about much more disruptive influence on human communication, providing them with all necessary communicative tools, and diminishing the necessity to engage in live communication considered more challenging. It is hard to predict what will happen in 20 years, since the Internet develops, and new modes of communication emerge, creating more impressive and more life-simulating impressions from communication; however, the negative social trends such as depression and isolation are likely to bring the face-to-face communication to the forefront, with people balancing their online and physical life in a much more thoughtful way.

Works Cited

“Community, Technology, and Changing Urban Places”. Lewis Code & Peggy Keall (2012): 1-40.

“Module 2”. Lewis Code & Peggy Keall (2012): 1-5.

Shklovski, Irina, Robert Kraut, and Lee Rainie. “The Internet and Social Participation: Contrasting Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analyses”. JCMC 10. 1 (2004). Web. 20 Oct. 2012. <http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/shklovski_kraut.html>

Sivyer, Anange. “Social Interaction in the Age of the Internet”. Ezine Articles. 2005. Web. 20 Oct. 2012. <http://ezinearticles.com/?Social-Interaction-in-the-Age-of-the-Internet&id=72384>

Tyler, R. Tom. “Is the Internet Changing Social Life? It Seems the More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same”. Journal of Social Issues 58. 1 (2002): 195-205.