Social interaction between individuals
predates recorded history, and it is not unreasonable to imaging tribes, towns,
cities flourishing due to the human ability to communicate directly (i.e.
speech) and coordinate their activities. Today the recently emerged domain of
digitally enhanced networking has matured to where it has defined a new virtual
space for interaction. For academic Harold Innis, he describes 'Communities of
Space' as something distinct from his 'Communities of Time'. With the one
framed around time denoting a community 'rooted' in a share place, due to the
ancestry or collective view built up over time; with this history a primary instrument
that ties people together. The concept of 'Communities of Space' on the other
hand, are built across vast differences, with common interests the fundamental unifying
factor (Carey 160). Analysed to the backdrop of the current world of social
media, and the ease of asynchronous communication over digital networks, the
communities become vast, and virtually limitless. This changes the dynamic of
social interaction the concept of communities becoming usurped in some ways by
digital networks, without the traditional interaction deemed key to
communication only a few decades ago. What are the ramifications of the newly
emerging digital ethos that has seemingly become intertwined with our everyday
social interactions? Andreas Wittel describes one such impact accordingly “In
network sociality, social relations are not ‘narrational’ but informational; they
are not based on mutual experience or common history, but primarily on an
exchange of data and on ‘catching up’ (52).
-
(Wittel on Carole
Stone's 'Networking. The Art of Making Friends 59)
This premise is difficult to rebut,
certainly looking to ‘communities’ such as Facebook with the hundreds of contrived
social relationships – people never meeting in real-life but communicating only
because they can. The dystopian view in much of science fiction has a future where
the personal has succumb completely to the technical, with humanity merging
with the technical in some way. However, this dark future is imaginary only and
there is no need to ‘throw out the baby with the bathwater when addressing the
issue’, we don’t need to become digital luddites in order to save traditional
social interaction. We need only see it as an extension of our communication
capabilities, the next step if you will. The danger is more aligned with the
cloaked sense of authenticity that digital interaction affords. It can
undermine social interaction at times, but, more importantly, it can create
pseudo communities where truth is obfuscated. Consider pseudo-science and the
new influence and feigned sense of legitimacy is has been afforded by digital
networks; the anti-vaccine movement provides a god example. The power of
communication allows vast amounts of information to be contributed, but to
bring balance we need to ensure we are interacting in personal and ensuring due
diligence in the domain of science and history etc. Smaller, in person
networking by way of conferences, university classes and work-places, to name a
few, all provide opportunities to build communities of trust and social interaction,
that continue building on our shared history, in positive conjunction with –
not despite -- the new world of digital networking.
References
Carey, James. "Space, Time, and
Communications. A Tribute to Harold Innis."
Wilfrid Laurier University, n.d. Web. 14 Feb. 2017.
Wittle, Andreas. "Toward a Network Sociality."
Theory, Culture & Society. 2nd ed. Vol. 18. London: Sage, 2001. 51-76.
Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment