Since electronic communication came into operation in 1977, the art of communication has changed considerably. Advances in technology have brought up other means of communication in which language is not used in the orthodox format. This is true for email messaging, chatroom conversations and the recent facebook communication. Language traditionalists are vexed with the way language has metaphosised in the wake of new technology (Cappella 228). Prophets of doom, together with language purists are crying foul over the way language is employed in social networking across the internet, and on face book. The use of emoticons, emotional pictorials, has had critics pouting that the Internet generation and the face book generations have lost the ability to communicate substantively (Cappella 228). This paper purports to examine both sides of such criticism and other criticisms leveled at online communication.
The main criticism leveled at online communication and other forms of related communication is that it has made the communicators lose the ability to communicate in substantive, thoughtful ways. The critics of contemporary online communication point out that the people who communicate through the said media do so in fragmented sentences (Cappella 228). They argue that the excessive use of shorthand is detrimental to the communication process. They call for the traditional form of communication where proper sentences are used in communicating (Cappella 228). Communication has been corrupted by these new technologies. While it is true that some people have lost the ability to communicate in substantive, thoughtful ways, it is useful to post that these new forms of communication have not destroyed the communication process (Cappella 228). This is because communication is getting to reach a message through some media. The fact is that the messages that are sent through the online devices get to the intended parties. Not only do they get to the recipients, butthey well decoded. Since the advent of online communication, no complaints have been posted that online communication is not effective (Cappella 228).
It is noteworthy that the volume of communication has increased with the advent of online communication. The most vocal critics of online communication are language purists. They are appalled at the perceived corruption of their languages, mostly the English language. This is because most online communication is done in English, the Internet having been created by English speaking people. What they fail to understand is that language is dynamic. Language is forever evolving, and it will continue to evolve forever (Csikszentmihalyi 124). There is also a lot of symmetry in the way communication is done online and in face book. The proof of this statement is that all companies in the world have social networking outlets. Many employees communicate with their bosses using these modes of communication. For example, most major corporations have a face book facility that enables customers, and the entire public to communicate with the company (Csikszentmihalyi 124).
It is also intellectually honest to admit that these critics of online communication have a valid point. It is true that some of the people who are involved in online communication have lost the power to communicate in substantive and thoughtful ways. This is especially so with the younger generation who have not passed through the formal forms of communication like the older generation. The younger people who have not written letters and engaged in other forms of traditional communications have their language affected (Csikszentmihalyi 124).
This generation of youngsters is so engrossed in online communication shortcuts that they have failed to learn proper language. A country like America has many children who cannot write and read proper English due to online communication. This is because online and related forms of communication have ccurtailed the need to study language in full. There are so many people who abbreviate words without knowing the full meaning of the abbreviated words. This is remarkably discouraging because language is the primary tool of learning (Anastasi andUrbina, 143). If high- school students are still writing sentence fragments because of communicating through face book and the Internet, then something is seriously wrong. This is the reason that is making education standards fall in the United States. Observations made, students in countries like South Korea are doing better than children in the United States should be a wake up call to the American nation. If the advent, of the technological revolution has a downside in communication, this should be addressed before the education system of America falls further (Anastasi and Urbina, 143).
Benefit from Our Service: Save 25% Along with the first order offer - 15% discount, you save extra 10% since we provide 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page
Another criticism made against communicating through face book, and the Internet is that the communication done through such media is rude and lacks basic etiquette. Scholars in HRM studies have found that when people speak over the email, they are more likely to be rude and lack manners than when they speak through letters, or face to face (Anastasi, and Urbina, 143). This is especially so if the people communicating have grudges towards each other. It is said that online communications encourages all forms of ill-mannered responses. Although this statement holds water, it is the feeling that rude behavior in communication has to do with the people involved than with the media in use (Anastasi and Urbina 143).
The criticisms of the communication avenues brought by technological advances will continue. This is change resistance by the older generation. The criticism to these forms of communications must also be seen in the light of the generation gap between the old and the young (Anastasi and Urbina 143). This is not, however, to sanction unthoughtful and ill-mannered communication in the name of online communication.