Communication

Technology has played a huge role in modern communication strategies. The use of instant messaging features on home computers, laptops, cell phones, and other electronic devices makes it very easy to communicate with others. Although instant messaging lacks the ability to recognize facial expressions, it is a very popular communication tool among teenagers.

Do you think technology has changed the way you communicate with people? I believe the more technology advances, the more our communication strategies will change. Our strategies will change so that we will spend less time in face to face contact with people and more time sending thoughts electronically.

Over the past few weeks I have been observing two of my children and their communication strategies. My son, Christian is 13, and my daughter Alyssa is 12. Both have access to computer - mediated devices which allows them to communicate with their peers electronically. However, they also have the ability to communicate face to face with their peers.

At the beginning of my study, I noticed right away that both Christian and Alyssa seemed to have met their communication goals by use of computer generated messages more than by telephone. The use of "instant message" seemed to be predominant over the use of e-mails. On occasions I recognized they would utilize both the telephone and the internet. I gathered that they made use of instant message feature more often because it was easy to converse with multiple peers at once. Three- way calling, an audible technology that seemed high tech only ten years ago, is being replaced with technology that can connect hundreds of people together at one time. Throughout my observations, I made note that at times peers of the subjects would visit. During the visits, there would be plentiful amounts of face to face communication between the two, and at the same time, they would be typing messages to others. Some messages were bolder and direct, more so than if the messages were face to face. Issues of interest to me were the facts that no matter which end of the message the subjects were on (receiver or sender); the opposite person could not truly know the author or the reader of the sent message. This to me seemed to be deceptive at times. Without face to face contact, it is very hard to determine the validity of any message. The same words spoken face-to-face, printed on paper or presented electronically provide