Online communication

 In the chapter ‘no need to call’, Turkel argues that telephone or else technology has destroyed the real interaction. In other words, technology has led to various developments in the world but it has hindered effective communication. In modern society, teenagers prefer to talk to their friends through instant message rather than phone call (TURKLE, 373). This is a big problem facing communities today since face-to-face communication and physical contacting have been ignored. Both young people and adults use social networks where they feel safe when communication rather than one-on-one conversations. Even though technology makes it easier to communicate, it has ruined the social interaction, increased loneliness and denied people social skills. In digital age, people need to improve the degree of empathy and maintain connection (TURKLE, 374). Technology plays a big role but people should not allow it to split the human relationship.

Focusing on the central ideas, I can agree with the author that in modern world, technology is associated with negative aspects.  It is true that technology or modern tools of communication have diminished the social interaction. In this chapter, it seems like Turkle is persuading the audiences on valuing face-to-face conversation and strengthen connection.  Online communication hinders people from knowing each other. It is important for people to value nonverbal communication such as facial expression, eye contact, tones, body language and more, since this will allow people demonstrate understanding and capture emotions. Online communication is important but people should value face-to-face communication and make it the primary means of communication as well the first choice. Generally, there is a need for a meaningful conversation and this is one way of developing intellectual skills and self-knowledge (TURKLE, 379). 

  WORTHAM (393) states that in modern world, technology is important as it maintains and strengthens relationship. The author says that she could be able to maintain the relationship between her boyfriends, family and friends through online communication while staying 3,000 miles away. She adds that online communication provides a real satisfaction which surpasses face-to-face communication.  Apps such as Gchat, twitter and Facebook allow people to discuss different things like travel plans and acts as an appetizer waiting for main things to happen.  In fact, online communication is not formal and people feel like they are physically close and have casual conversation (WORTHAM, 397). People who are searching romantic partners are using mobile apps and websites to find the best friends.  Through a credible research and own experience, Wortham affirms that online communication is best for interactions.

  I disagree with Wortham argument that Smartphone applications or online communication maintains relationship.Well; online communication is efficient in connecting people as the author is saying but people who stay away from each other need face-to-face communication where they will feel happy and maintain their relationship.  The truth is that people who have social interaction builds quality life through understanding each other and sharing.  I disagree with her opinion because online communication cannot create trust and credibility. However, face-to-face communication creates a meaningful l connection, trust and loyalty.  I believe that internet does not have a positive impact on friendship but rather it is a platform which disconnects people. Even if people spend hours chatting, people are isolated and they do have an opportunity to interact and experience the real world (WORTHAM, 397).

  In the article by Gladwell, social media has hindered social development and social changes. In other words, Social media is not an effective tool for communication when it comes to creating social changes. In the past decades, Civil Right movement succeeded because people were committed and dedicated to bring changes (Gladwell, 399). They could not rely on social media but rather they were united by personal ties and they had effective leadership, personal obligation and visions. He says that social media brings weak-ties which hinder social changes. Generally, in order to bring social changes, people need strong ties through personal contacts, face-to-face interaction and activism (Gladwell, 399). 

 

I agree with Gladwell that in bringing social changes, personal relationship, endurance, commitment and social interaction are key elements. However, social media platform is unable to form strong ties which create committed followers. Social media develops networking and consensus but lacks authority and hierarchy. Revolution is a process which needs a group people coming together with common goals. In other words, social changes need strong connections where people will share information and assign duties. Note that social media is not bad because people connected online will share information and receive updates on revolution (Gladwell, 399). However, social media platform should not be the starting point. The important thing is that a hierarchy level is needed for the purpose of making decision, implementing procedures and setting goals.  Note that social media does not have accountability or authority and this makes it difficult to make agreements and to set obligation in achieving goals. Generally, I agree with the author’s point that social change needs strong ties which are created by a centralized leadership and actions (Gladwell, 399).

 

 

Work cited

 TURKLE SHERRY. No Need to Call.

WORTHAM  JENNA. I Had a Nice Time With You Tonight. On the App

Gladwell  Malcolm “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted