Think before sending

A concept that caught my eye and interest was that on the new media. It covered new and inventive ways in which people are using computers and cell phones to communicate. I found the examples both interesting and in some cases amusing. While most of this doesn’t seem new anymore, it’s important to remember that digital media, in comparison to other forms of mass media, are still in their infancy and adolescence. While print media has been around for centuries, radio is early in its second century and TV has only been around for about 70 years. When you consider that computers weren’t common in households as recently as twenty years ago, and cell phones were even less common, there is still a lot for us to get to know about what they can do.

 

The part that really got me was the part about sexting. As if adult content wasn’t already out of control on the internet, the idea that people would start using their phones to pass on adult photos and have lewd conversations really shouldn’t surprise me. What I find surprising is how few people realize just how little privacy they have when using those forms of communication. In the olden days, phones had to be tapped for someone to hear a conversation. Now that text conversation you just had is available to anyone who can get access to your phone or the provider’s servers. Same with those cute pictures of your kids, or your significant other’s privates.

Hot or Cold?

The idea that the medium is the message isn’t really all that new. When we think about it, and as we have discussed in previous chapters of the book, location and environment can be as important to the message as the content of the message itself. Those mediums that engage more than just the ears of the audience are likely to be more effective, because they are able to appeal to a wider audience.

This does however create a larger problem in terms of picking the speaker. In a medium like television, you now have to take into account appearance factors as well as speaking ability. When using a medium like the radio, one only had to focus on vocal quality and control. If one were using print media, then the main consideration was in organization of content for maximum interest by the reader. While my examples are in reverse order, we see that as the medium becomes more evolved technologically, more factors have to be taken into account in terms of the sender receiver relationship.

I think the problem with the cool-hot distinction is that it doesn’t apply to all. Depending on the message, or the target audience, coolness can be a detractor. A prime example in my mind is when I see TV ads soliciting donations for abused animals or starving children. The images that are displayed evoke an outraged response from me that doesn’t match the cool narrative I hear. As a result the content becomes less valid on both sides, and rather than being prodded to donate, I’m prodded to change the channel.

Cyber-Friends

I have made friendships that existed exclusively in cyberspace. The major difference between them and face to face relationships is that they really aren’t substantial. That’s not to say that there isn’t a certain level of deep intimacy, because there is, but that intimacy is false in a way. In an online friendship or relationship there are two ways that you can approach it. One is to be honest about yourself and your personality, the other is to have a persona that isn’t really you. In both cases you have the ability to interact with people at a level that, due to anonymity, more vulnerable than you might experience in person.

That is unfortunately also the problem with those relationships. Without meeting face to face, you don’t have the same kind of investment in the friendship that you would with someone that you can actually spend time with outside of the comfort of the virtual world. Online I have access to millions of people who share interests with me to some varying degree. I don’t necessarily need to be your friend online, because I can just as easily go find someone else who will be just as interesting and accepting as you. For that reason, none of my online relationships have lasted without me being able to actually meet the person on the other side of the screen. That being said, both my best friend and my wife are the result of online friendships that became face to face friendships.

In the Workplace

One concept that I found interesting was that of workplace relationships. In my own experience, the smaller the company, the harder it is to separate personal relationships from professional ones. Smaller workplaces usually mean that you will interact with a specific group of individuals in a team more often. The increase in day to day interaction between members will usually mean that members will find themselves learning more intimate details about other members of their team or department than they would in a workplace with twice as many people. This level of intimacy can and will lead to more interactions outside of the office, especially between people with similar interests and hobbies.

In my last company my national team and our support teams numbered at less than one hundred and fifty people. Whenever we got together at the main office we would spend time after work hanging out and catching up with each other. The time we spent wasn’t just personal time, as many of us worked remotely, the time at the main office was important to us professionally as we used that time during work and off hours to keep the faces and voices together. Company functions encouraged us to bring our families so in many cases spouses got to know each other too.

 

In my current company, my department has over 500 people nationally and support teams that number in the thousands. In a month, other than the 15 employees that are in my region, I might interact with the same person twice, where in my previous company, I would interact with the same people on a daily basis. This is very important because in the larger company hierarchy and status differences become much more pronounced and important. In the smaller company I could take things directly to other departments. Filters were less important because to make things work we needed to be able to move quickly. Now, rather than keep my hierarchy informed, I take things to my hierarchy because information needs to be filtered and relayed in ways that allow other departments to categorize and prioritize issues.

Etiquette

I think that some of the text’s suggestions on communication media are a little outdated. When it comes to cellular phones, it is true that there is a time and a place, but to lump a restaurant in with the movies or church is apples to oranges. You don’t talk at the movies or church, regardless if it’s on the phone or with the person sitting next to you. It’s rude to the rest of the audience. In today’s business world, cell phones are a way of life. In my work I’m expected to be able to answer it 24/7. It’s important that my ringtone is appropriate for business and that use in a social situation is limited to business.

Answering machines and fax machines are quickly becoming outdated technology. There are safer and more secure ways to transmit form data than fax machines, and voicemail has become the predominant form of leaving messages. Even most home phone services come with voicemail making home answering machines obsolete. Faxes can now be transmitted directly to an e-mail box, and most fax machines are equipped with scan software making them capable of scanning documents into formats that can be stored on a computer and disseminated electronically at a lower cost and in a more secure manner.

Screen names fall into a different category as you have what’s personal and what’s professional. Most companies assign you a screen name that is easily identified as you for inter-office communication. If you are looking for work, create a username that can be easily identified as you for prospective employers and use that for your search. Conference calls fall into the same category. Make sure that when you speak to a group that cannot see you that you identify yourself and your position so that people know who you are and what your role is and how it is pertinent to the discussion.

Technology abuse is abundant in society today. Beepers, and answering machines haven’t really been a bother to me, but when people set me aside to have meaningless conversations with their friends, it sends a message that whoever is on the phone is more important than me. The same thing applies when putting someone on hold to take another call. That is no different than when someone approaches you while having a face to face conversation and interjects to pass information to one of the participants. It is up to the participants to decide which conversation is more important and kindly excuse themselves if need be. Rudeness is only in not acknowledging both parties and letting them know how you are prioritizing their potential discourse.

Organizational Symbiosis

The relationship between organizations and the environment is symbiotic. A prime example that is significant to us here in Northern California would be that of technology and Silicon Valley. Since the resources that we use to build key components of electronics are very abundant here, many technology companies such as HP, Intel and others have set up offices and manufacturing in the area. These companies need employees that are capable of designing devices as well as coming up with new and innovative ways of taking advantage of and improving the goods that are made and sold.

My high school was very much a reflection of the community and town that I grew up in. The emphasis on education was strong, but it also encouraged vocational training and skills so that its students could be suited to fill different needs of the community as adults. While some students left to pursue jobs and careers outside of the community, many stayed in the area after graduating and took up careers or opened businesses in the community. Even if only sticking around to start and raise families, the school provided educational paths that would allow its students to pursue whatever futures they desired.

As far as ethical obligations go, I don’t really think that educational institutions have any obligations to their communities beyond what that which they owe to the student body. The symbiotic relationship between a company and its environment is the same as the one between educational institutions and their communities. At all levels, the majority if not all of the student body will come from the surrounding community. It is in the best interest of the organization to make sure that the community is one that values a safe and comfortable learning environment. This is even more important at the college or University level since they depend on more than just tuition for success. It’s imperative that their graduates are successful so that they can recruit students from outside the community as well as recruiting top notch instructors that can bring things like research and scholarship grants that help to keep their facilities and curriculum relevant.

TMI?

One topic I found fascinating was on self-disclosure. Communication is really one of the most important aspects of any relationship. We’ve all heard the phrase “Too much information” or TMI at some point. I like how the text differentiates between self-disclosures and certain statements about what you’re feeling. Making the distinction between telling someone something about you that’s personal, rather than sharing an opinion is important for both the sender and the receiver.

The suggestion about time and place for disclosure is also important. Telling someone that you’re allergic to peanuts while discussing a work project may not be the most appropriate time. Just like letting someone you’ve just met know that you snore loudly when you sleep might cause them to decide that you’re expectations for the relationship are a little premature.

The part about responding to disclosures was the one that I liked the best. It’s reminder that just because someone reveals something personal about themselves or shares a personal situation with you, they aren’t always looking for an answer externally. It’s also important to keep that in mind when you choose to disclose something to someone else. Choosing whom and how you disclose something should be done with how the receiver will react in mind as well. If you want support and understanding without advice, going to someone who tries to fix things may not be the correct avenue. Likewise, if someone comes to you with a situation or problem, it may be wise to probe a little into what they’re looking for in a response, especially if the topic or disclosure is of a serious or delicate nature.

Who's on top?

Whether it is the competitive symmetry or submissive symmetry, I think they are equally the most difficult to change. We naturally resist change, and since the symmetrical roles would require the most change for anything to get done, they would cause the most friction. That friction would be easily noticeable and in most cases, to spare feelings one might pull back on making a change or the other member may attempt to change as well, switching the type of symmetry, but leaving the relationship with same conflicts.

 

In the same manner, the most damaging one to a relationship would be submissive symmetry. Since both parties are depending on the other for the relationship to move forward, the relationship will eventually stagnate. While some may consider this the least damaging outcome, in my experience it is the most likely to cause irreparable damage. In the other two scenarios, there is hope that dissatisfaction with the relationship will be voiced prior to the inevitable boiling of frustration that comes with nothing being done.

 

I think competitive symmetry could be the most damaging of the rigid role relations in terms of self-esteem. If the members of the relationship are truly incompatible, yet fighting for dominance, there is the highest chance that a conflict will occur that gets out of hand. One the gloves come off, there is no end to the potential of damage to both parties egos. Even the winner of such a conflict could find themselves regretting something they said or did. In the end, as the text suggests, I think it is best if the partners share one-up and one-down positions. It leads to the most satisfactory outcomes all the way around.

Does this make me look fat?

For me, relationships, romantic, or platonic, begin and end with personality. Physical appearance factors in only in that it can give me a brief overview of certain habits that help give me an initial impression of a person. When it comes to romance, this becomes even more important. Society has certain expectations in regards to relationships that puts a strong emphasis on keeping the same partner for life. While that standard has loosened up a bit over the years, we still look unfavorably on promiscuity. Since over time, our looks will change, and we will become less attractive, compatibility in personality really needs to be the standard by which we choose our partners.

 

10 years ago I would have been more accepting of Duck’s theory. Having started a relationship with my wife from over 600 miles away, does however throw a little bit of a wrench in the social cue portion of the theory. With the advances that we have made technologically in the last decade, physical proximity is not as much of a factor as it used to be. People are able to meet and build relationships over long distances, and then decide whether the next step is worth the change in location.

 

In my younger and stupider days I had eliminated someone based on a pre-interaction cue. Later, after that person and I had become very good friends, I made what I would call a foolish mistake by reconsidering that elimination in the hopes that it would affect a decision they were making that would impact our relationship. In the end they were more mature than I was and made sure that I didn’t go too far and ruin what to this day is my most treasured friendship.