Computer Mediated Communication Technology Advances

Computer Mediated Communication Technology Advances by Adrian
Technology is as much a part of us as we are part of it. Thurlow, Lengel, and Tomic (2004) noted that technology is all around us in many forms. This is very true, and it seems like we can’t go through a day without engaging in some form of man made technology, whether it’s using a fork to eat with, or the modern convenience of a car that parks its self.As I type this Internet blog, my digital flat screen television is on, I have http://www.yahoo.com/ open for emails and Instant Messaging, my cell phone sits close by, and the cable modem lights blink to remind me that I’m connected electronically to anyone with a computer or even a television set. This is because I can type and send an instant message to a CNN anchor, such as Rick Sanchez on http://www.twitter.com/ about a particular topic or issue of interest, which may be posted on the television screen scroll feature almost instantaneously. This message can be read by anyone in the world who has a television or a computer and can view CNN; so really, we are all interconnected in so many ways. This instant interconnectedness has made our world much smaller and made our information driven world even faster. Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) technology has increased our ability to connect with people from so many different backgrounds and in many different forums, such as http://www.facebook.com/.
Some critics of CMC note that this form of communication is ineffective because of the lack of Face to Face (FtF) interaction. Thurlow et al. (2004) noted that these critics argued that the Reduced Social Cues (RSC) Model showed that without social cues, such as facial expressions and body language, CMC is more difficult and lacks flow and cohesion. In addition, Thurlow et al. (2004) added that because of the lack of these visual cues in communication, people are more likely to misread plain text communication (RSC Model), which may lead to more confused or misinterpreted responses while participating in CMC (miss communication).
This may be true if one just reads a plain text e-mail message, and I’ve seen this happen. Although, in today’s technological innovative CMC environment, there are multiple ways to communicate which more closely resembles FtF interaction, and allows for one to view visual cues such as facial expressions. These CMC technology improvements include such advancements as http://www.skype.com/ which is a web/text/camera technology communication website. In addition, there have been advances in video computer cameras and other social networking websites that allow for instantaneous access via picture posts and video clips, such as http://www.twitter.com/.
As we have evolved in this new technology age, most of us have adapted our responses and learned to interpret messages and information through CMC. We may need fewer visual cues to communicate effectively and correctly interpret Internet messages, such as e-mail, especially with the improvements in technology that have helped us become more three dimensional when we communicate on-line.
Again, most of us have adapted to all of the technology around us whether we agree with it or not. In addition, younger people are growing up in this very advanced CMC technology era, which in many cases, closely mimics FtF communication or a form of it. Children quickly learn to navigate this fast changing technological CMC environment as the following Microsoft "I'm a PC" commercial on Youtube shows:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mz06mylMJY
As we move forward in this communication age, we will continue to advance and improve our ability to instantaneously connect in our fast growing CMC society. In the last five years consumer demand for more intimate forms of CMC may have driven the technological advances we have seen in CMC. Thurlow, et al. (2004) explained that such inventions like the telephone and text messaging originated as experiments or technologies designed for military uses/communication (email and the Internet), and business communication (texting). Thurlow et al. (2004) added that consumers wanted to use these technological tools to further enhance communication.
Consumers possibly instinctively drove researchers to connect people in a manner more closely related to FtF communication because of a possible human instinct to connect FtF. Thurlow et al. (2004) noted that media richness of computer technology includes the ability to transmit multiple cues, immediate feedback capabilities, its ability to support natural language, and the websites level of personal focus. All of these advances in CMC are important, and as previously noted are tools we use to communicate and connect with one another to exchange ideas and information, share common experiences and interests, participate in business communication and networking, etc. In addition, these technological advances in CMC has made us more organic, three dimensional, and more human during online communication.
With that said, the computer will never completely replace the human experience, and the joy of being around the people you love FtF. Striking a balancing between FtF and CMC is important and probably the healthiest approach in this era of enhanced CMC technology.
Here is a comedic short video that speaks to this, sent out by Tony Robbins to his Twitter followers, like me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN2HAroA12w
Thurlow, Lengel, Tomic (2004). Computer Mediated Communication: Social Interaction
and the Internet. Los Angeles: Sage