Social Media Montana

There’s a big difference between communication and conversation, and it’s here that our use of social media often fails us.

Nobody would confuse a billboard advertisement with two neighbors chatting over the fence.  Both are communication, but only the neighbors are having a conversation.  Yet, with the ubiquity of personal websites, blogs, Facebook (spit!), Twitter and numerous other social media incarnations, people are deluding themselves into believing they’re having meaningful interactions.

Conversation is a two-way exchange of ideas, thoughts and feelings.  In a conversation, both parties are equally important and have an opportunity to express a view or opinion.  It’s a meeting of the minds (and sometimes hearts) and it draws people closer.  It’s intimate, and it’s necessary.  Humans need conversation.

It’s never been easier to communicate, yet most websites, blogs and social network posts are, at best, written exhibitionism – the Internet equivalent of “Look at me!  Look at me!”  At worst, what flows from social media is mental effluent – word belches and diarrhea of the mind.

We’re drowning in communication while marooned in a desert of conversation, but it’s not the fault of social media.  In fact, with cell phones, e-mail, blog comments and Facebook-like (spit!) mediums, it’s never been easier to converse with people.  But we don’t.  My observations lead me to believe that people want to feel (and proclaim) that they’re connected to a huge network of family and friends without putting in the effort to really listen to, and care about, what any individual has to say.  It’s easier to tweet, blog or post to all our “friends” or “followers” what we had for lunch or think of the latest movie than it is to spend a few minutes crafting a personal e-mail to someone who actually uses their brain.

I have a mature, intelligent relative who loves to blog about life and the importance of family.  Time spent on her blog is reflected in its quality, yet she can’t find the time to craft a personal e-mail.  And why should she?  Time spent having a conversation with one person is time she could be using to broadcast her feelings, views and opinions to the multitudes.  Today, “Look at me!” trumps “How are you?”

Facebook (spit!) fools us into believing we’re having a conversation when we click thumbs-up icons.  Balderdash!  I get Facebook (spit!) friends requests, and when I click “accept” I never hear from the people again.  They don’t want to be my friend; they want my icon in their friends tray so they can pretend they’re popular.

I send people e-mails all the time, yet a significant percentage of people never even acknowledge the message.  Sure, stupid jokes or simple notices don’t require a response, but when I spend 20 minutes creating a personal message, I’d like to know the person I was thinking of at least read it.  But in today’s anti-conversation ethos, it’s OK to do nothing.  Even my kids don’t respond to e-mails.

Would anyone listen to someone express an idea face-to-face, and then without as much as a nod or blink, turn around and walk away?  No, yet it’s OK online.  Why?  What are we afraid of?  Have we become so shallow that we can’t spend a few minutes on one person?

I understand, use and appreciate social media, social networks and the power they have to disseminate information.  I also know that some people actually use them to build and nurture genuine relationships.  I just don’t see it often.

Social media does not replace honest, two-way conversation.  Just because lots of people hear you, doesn’t mean they give a crap about what you say.  And “friends” without conversation are just icons in a digital folder.

###