Limits of Communication in the Communication Age

[pipebaum81]

Woodsroad's thread from seven months ago concerning political discourse bumped up today. I don't know if participating in that bumped antiquated thread violates the discussion from earlier this week but it is too fascinating to leave alone. The amount of time and thought put in by the PM all-stars has got my mind rolling.
In some ways Facebook, Twitter, Email, and Forums (i.e. internet) have increased communication more than the telephone ever did. With a phone you needed to have a number in order to call. You actually had to know someone who wanted to talk to you. Since the inception of the internet, we have allowed a near always open portal to our living rooms and places of work and now it is mobile. Strangers with even stranger names like peckinpahhombre, lordnoble, trailboss, sablebrush52, ssjones pop into our world and say whatever it is they want to. Sometimes it even makes sense.
Oftentimes though communication breaks down and fast. In Woodsroad aforementioned thread, Peck said "In a forum like this though, where we only stare at the written word without proper context or the ability to read body language, it truly does make it exceedingly difficult to have a civilized discourse." I concur completely but come to the following question: Why is it that in such an age of communication do we find ourselves so far behind the power curve in our abilities to communicate through text?
Is it because we are the incipient computer generations having to learn all over again how to communicate tone, context and other nuances now through a different means? Will this improve through the ages? In an age where a written letter was the only means of communication, were people better at conveying true accurate meaning through the written word?
I would love to hear some thoughts on this matter but please make sure you convey your thoughts carefully as I am limited in my capacities to understand in this age of communication.
j/B

 

[instymp]

A hand written note/letter is still the most effective way to communicate with a person of interest.

Phone call is # 2.

After that.... you decide.

 

[daveinlax]

I've been reading pipe boards and use to participate in chats pretty much daily since pretty much the beginning and I've learned and accept the fact that most agreement ends with I smoke a pipe. 8O

 

[woodsroad]

The amount of time and thought put in by the PM all-stars has got my mind rolling.

Really? Because it got my eyes rolling.

Is it because we are the incipient computer generations having to learn all over again how to communicate tone, context and other nuances now through a different means? Will this improve through the ages?

No, it will not. We are not failing to communicate. We are failing to perceive meaning, inference, emotion and a plethora of other things. Why? Because we are creatures who communicate using all of our senses. Limit that communications to only one channel, and the bandwidth simply can't convey the message. So, for what it is, the internet is a phenomenal communications tool. It's just limited in scope.

Communication is 3D....the Forum communication is 1D.

There you have it.
Still, I am amazed that folks can stand by and watch their hobby (not to mention their personal liberties) eviscerated by their own government, and not want to talk about it.
Can I show you my Dr. Grab-bar collection?

 

[warren]

There was a time when people thought long and hard about every word they wrote. Nuance was carefully considered so that the intent could not be misconstrued when the letter was read days, or even months later. Correspondence was carefully crafted so that the intended meaning was, in fact, conveyed. Many times a letter, upon rereading by the author was simply set aside and never sent. Other times the letter might have to be rewritten many times before the author was satisfied that there was no room for misconstruing the intent.
Add anonymity to the mix, as in forums and the like, and many of us have sent off missives we almost immediately regret.
We tend to treat forum contact as conversations when in fact they are very different, as pointed out by many members. If I decide to go overboard in the evening and have a second glass of whatever, no more texts, forum responses, nor emails becomes the rule. Too often I have fired up the computer in the morning and "I wrote what! What the hell was I thinking!" I do so detest embarrassing myself.
edit: I detest embarrassing myself accidentally. I have been known to do so intentionally.

 

[sablebrush52]

Why is it that in such an age of communication do we find ourselves so far behind the power curve in our abilities to communicate through text?

The above posts have offered very pertinent responses to this question. I'll add a little something else, which is that not everyone is good at writing conversation. In an environment where call and response happens almost in real time a lack of facility for composing one's thoughts accurately into words results in impoverished communication.
Also, while we live in a time of unparallelled access to open expression, much of it is dumbed down. Everyone has an opportunity to speak, but not everyone has something to say.

 

[buroak]

This has all been rather dispiriting. Would that I could offer some optimistic perspective, but six years of teaching college students left me with precious little hope for the future of communication.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

People seem to respond to triggers without thinking more deeply into an issue. That sounds like racism, that sounds like communism, or that sounds like a jerkism. And, then communication becomes rote mini-diatribes that sway the conversation away into oblivion. One word can derail an otherwise thoughtful post. One person can set off a firestorm that gets a post deleted. "You're wrong and I am right," is the motivator in social media. Whereas, when I was in debate, I remember that we used to acknowledge the other person's ideas respectfully and then offer our own opinions or insights. The whole process of debate back in the old days of stacks of notecards and tie clips, was to convince the judges that we were the better communicator, not to try to change the mind of the opponent, which is impossible in this world of right and wrongs. We've lost thoughtful communication on many issues (maybe thought in general), and we've lost decorum and respect for each other. It used to be that the first person to lose their temper was an automatic fail. Now, it's the first person to leave a shouting match. It used to be that we tried to understand where our fellow debater was coming from, and now it's all "let's drive this person away."
and, I don't think anyone is out there modelling decorum and respect for each other. The talking heads just fuel the polarization and not helping the problem. And, the people who might be great models for us, don't get our attention. It's not as much fun to watch "understanding" as it is to watch a fistfight in the alley. This is why I just avoid the conversation when it comes to politics. A few words, and I can probably guess what your series of diatribes is going to be on either side. I'd rather laugh, think, and help a brother out than to watch a fight or watch someone get kicked when down. That doesn't mean the issues aren't important to me. I still read, watch as many news sources as possible, and talk with good friends (in person). Going to social media or a forum isn't going to change my mind much, especially when I don't ever see anything productive happening from it, or hear any solutions that I can agree with.
I have learned much about what has been going on in the tobacco world on here. I have also supplemented what I've learned from other sources, especially my pipe club and various other pipe news. And, I've kept an open mind by listening patiently to the opposition to our hobby. And, I think that much of what is going on is faced with an emotional response on here than actual insight into social motivations. There is equal misunderstandings on both sides of the fence. But, I guess that is always the case when we stop listening as much as we do talking.
:::sigh::: I'm not much better. I'm human. So, I just avoid the fights when I can. To be honest, some arguments between folks on here have made it painful to visit here on some days. I have to use social media for my business, so I get the BS polarized world enough in just trying to make a living. I see it in professional organizations, professional forums, people putting their ideologies before making real connections and learning. I really don't want that crap when I want to kick back with like-minded pipeguys and discuss the hobby, even if I agree in spirit with the points.
Just my two cents.

 

[klause]

Patrick, Michael - your comments were an absolute pleasure to read. Thank you.

 

[ssjones]

Strangers with even stranger names like peckinpahhombre, lordnoble, trailboss, sablebrush52, ssjones pop into our world and say whatever it is they want to. Sometimes it even makes sense.

Sometimes, sometimes????
I was speaking last week with the retired owner of the restaurant company where I have worked for 25 years. Prior to staring that company, he was a senior Marriott Vice President. We were reminiscing about his personal secretary at Marriott, who followed him into his private enterprise. She was the prototypical Executive Secretary (and still reminds me of Joan on Mad Men). A master of the written communication. As my responsibilities increased, she also served as my part-time secretary. Her editing and grammatical skills were impressive. I learned to polish my letters and other communications to the best of my extent before forwarding to her for typing. Anyone who forwarded a poorly worded letter to her felt the wrath for her editing time. Of course she also retired many years ago and subsequent replacements have never had her skills. Now, I realize those folks never will. Text messaging, email (mail sent electronically!), Facebook and Twitter are killing the written word.

 

[condorlover1]

I still write letters to people in long hand using a fountain pen and 'Bank black iron oxide' ink which is a great indelible ink. Before the Royal Mail in the UK became so damned annoying you really didn't even need an envelope. All that was required was to fold the sides of the letter and then fold over into thirds, seal with a sticky and then write the address on the front and add a postage stamp. The system has worked perfectly well since before even the invention of the postage stamp! Now days the UK Post Office complains probably as it means extra work or something.

 

[griffonwing]

+1 Cosmic/ae1pt
I would also like to add that the texting/communication exploded faster than speaking/written/phone communication. There are also "no rules" now, as many of those involved in texting/forum conversations are either not mature enough or don't stop to really think about their reply and put it into sense.
There is a complete lack of grasping basic grammatical understanding. Take the 14 punctuation marks.

http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/punctuation/what/fourteen-punctuation-marks.html

Everyone should have known and memorized these by the time they reach high school. But many do not. The inclusion of emoticons/acronyms does help, such as LOL (joking) and :? (confused/hrmm). You can speak and hear inflection, but you cannot read it. But I think we can remedy that.
I read an article on the Mental Floss website

http://mentalfloss.com/article/12710/13-little-known-punctuation-marks-we-should-be-using
This article is not only hilarious, but I think it should be added to the school curriculum world-wide, as it would give a more clear indication on how the sentence should be read.

 

[phred]

There is really no fundamental difference between words written in ink on a page and words written in pixels on a screen - they're both written communication, both read using one's eyeballs (in most cases), and both subject to the writer's ability to communicate and the reader's ability to comprehend.
The fundamental difference, IMHO, is the relative efficiency of the medium in spreading a message. Longhand is slower than typing, and using a typewriter is marginally slower than using a word processor or computer keyboard. The advent of text messaging using cellphone keypads. This allows written communication to be produced and sent out almost as quickly as spoken communication, and there are frequently situations in which a few minutes of reflection, editing, and revision would do those communications a world of good.
I'll freely admit to being a technophile - my handwriting remains atrocious despite the best efforts of my mother and the public school system, and I suspect that it's a function of trying to set the words down as quickly as I think them up, so learning to operate a keyboard was a serious advance in my ability to produce written communications (essays, papers, school assignments, etc.). Typewriter keyboards, it turns out, were intentionally laid out in such a way as to slow down writing - if keys were pressed too quickly, the mechanism jammed. Texting, originally done using multiple button presses on telephone keypads, revealed other limitations of key-based writing and resulted in LOL-speak. This is how language evolves, and while I used to rail about it myself, I understand the desire to communicate conveniently. Old conventions die hard, and the new kids always come up with some way to irritate the conventional and distinguish their chosen forms from those of their elders.

 

[northernneil]

As with every generation, there are some who take the written word very seriously and some who could care less. In fact, I am pretty sure the illiteracy rate is lower today that it has been in the past. So personally, I think written word is more important than ever and I feel there are younger generations who care deeply about preserving it.

 

[warren]

If we all spoke or wrote as quickly as we think this would be a sad world in deed. That is the problem with "instant" communication, too few think before responding. Therefore, responses often times simply become reactions, not thought out and cogent, just blind reactions. This is especially true on forums. Too many knee jerk reactions with little or no thought given to the impact of the response on others.
We should think about the response, type it, read it as objectively as possible and then, if satisfied, post it. This is most true when responding to a perceived attack. One should always reread the "offending" post, parsing it as necessary, before responding. Always give the benefit of the doubt when doubt exists.

 

[pipebaum81]

To say that I have enjoyed the responses to this thread is an understatement. Thanks everyone so much.

We are failing to perceive meaning, inference, emotion and a plethora of other things. Why? Because we are creatures who communicate using all of our senses.

I completely agree with this for our current state of affairs. With that said, I have faith, Woodsroad that the ever adaptable human will get better at this. Perhaps at a certain point people will improve text communication because its essential role in our modern and apparently future society.
warren, cosmic, and phred have spoken to the time factor and its impact on careful wording and well thought out communication. I submit that with the arrival of the text messages and the internet, we have invented a new form of communication. Written text in real time. I don't know that it has ever existed in our history. I think it separates itself from other previously used forms of communication. I think it may be important to recognize this so those that are frustrated can perhaps feel a bit better since this form is in its infancy. The result may be that with the passage of time people will need less time to think about what they say and still be able to effective. Think back to silent films and how long words were placed on screen for the less literate masses to read. The majority of us just read quicker than previous generations. Light speed quicker. Our brains may catch up to the speed of the texting age.
Then there is sable, Patrick, and cosmic's comments as a whole. Would anyone argue that their thoughts are not well presented? (less the smart-ass detracting remarks everyone is getting ready to post about this sentence) The question is, do you KNOW how long it took them to put down what they shared? I would guess that it took them a while for the initial draft. They probably went over it for an edit or two. This is my gut feeling but only because that is exactly what I have to do to present myself the way I want to. For all I know they threw it together and had it done in minutes. They could be just that good! The key as they pointed out is that we are all on different levels of capability. In the name of civil discourse we all must be understanding and give our fellow man the benefit of the doubt before final conclusions are drawn. Tragically this is so much easier said than done.
One idea I haven’t seen shared. Until we know each other, what level of respect do we have for one another? warren’s anonymity comments touch on this but it’s more than just not being accountable for ones comments. I take my time writing and thinking about what I post because of my respect for you lot. My favorite post-ers are those that exhibit conduct far beyond reproach; knowledge amassed through experience. While driving, most of us wouldn’t curse our own mother if she had cut us off in traffic but the stranger in a BMW or Jaguar is at better odds for our abuse. Oftentimes we are speaking to strangers who haven’t earned our respect or admiration. How we treat those that can offer us nothing is very telling of who we are. DickholeDoucher69 may not warrant our respect but, as gentlemen, who do we choose to be?
I am humbled by the vast majority of contributors to this forum.

 

[pipebaum81]

gigger48, if I could change my user name for a day I would take the honor gladly. Much thanks
griffonwing, Where would we be without you؟ Why are we not be using these vital punctuation marks especially in light of all we have talked about here‽ I am amiss if I do not recognize your contribution here especially with the Mental Floss link. I intend to take a serious step towards using as many of these punctuation marks as I can.

 

[klause]

Pipebaum, this is a brilliant thread, with some very interesting contributions - its this kind of thing that keeps me coming back to this forum.
Kusdos to you, and all the positive, eloquent contributors - its been a real pleasure dipping into this.

 

[oldreddog]

I was going to add my own inane musings on this thread but other more eloquent and energetic contributors have put so much so well.

I do however daily decry the increasing dwindling attention span of many. It appears that reading analytically is on the wane, and reading online has just become a kind of speed reading and link clicking exercise.
A certain quote by Voltaire seems to have gained much currency in the media in the last week or so, but to my mind the great man's words on tolerance seem very applicable here;
“It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each others’ folly – that is the first law of nature.”

 

[pipebaum81]

Pipebaum, this is a brilliant thread, with some very interesting contributions – it’s this kind of thing that keeps me coming back to this forum

Klause, you are generous with your words and I am grateful. All I did was go off woodsroad's fine thread and all the other contributors picked up from there.
oldreddog, I hadn't hear that quote from Voltaire. Since first reading it I have thought on it and I find myself troubled by it. I don't exactly know why. For starters, I love it. It speaks to the flawed condition we find ourselves in; the soft underbelly of mankind. Mercy, sympathy, understanding, pity, empathy is what is needed if one values a pursuit of happiness for oneself as well as others. Maybe my unease comes from my sense that I don't offer the above enough. If the quote is accurate (which I think it is) why would it be that mankind is so ready to withhold such reciprocation? Should we not understand each other's "frailty and error" leading us immediately to mercy and empathy? Typing this freeform has lead me to my unease. And this is its core.