The Conversation Ends

"The Conversation", a movie directed by Francis Ford Coppola and released in 1974, was recently shown on Turner Classic Movies. Widely acclaimed, this feature film tells the story of a surveillance expert, played by Gene Hackman, who investigates a potential murder plot involving the subjects he has been hired to follow. While the movie is worth watching for its suspense and craftsmanship, it is the opening scene of the movie, however, that deserves attention here.

The movie begins with the two primary subjects of the surveillance walking through a teeming Union Square plaza in San Francisco. People are sitting on benches while others are strolling on a beautiful day, engrossed in conversation, enjoying the scenery, or lost in thought.

What's striking is how such a scene could never be replicated in this day and age. A closer look reveals no one is on a cell phone; no one is using Twitter; no one is listening to MP3s. In short, the individuals are part of their larger surroundings as opposed to a collection of isolated, and ever-moving, bubbles in which one has sequestered his- or herself. Posting one's activities on Twitter, while forsaking any attention to those around you, is not participating in society.

The march of technology moves forward. It is a double-edged sword that, on one hand, provides greater material comfort and improved living standards, and on the other, has the potential to isolate each of us further from our neighbors. How ironic, as many before have pointed out, that a medium such as the Internet along with advanced portable devices, with their great promise of bringing the world closer together, may instead be pushing everyone further apart.

The long-term, societal ramifications of our new, shared behavior will not be known for some time. The best any of us can do is be aware of our actions and observe how they may affect others. Technology has the potential to establish an artificial duality between the individual and society as a whole. It doesn't need to be that way.

This is the last post to Twitter Backlash. This blog began simply as a way for the author to exercise his writing chops from time to time. In search of a subject, the ascent of Twitter in the public consciousness seemed to be ideal in providing fodder for endless discussion and analysis. Every effort has been made to excise any snark that may have crept into my copy -- there is enough of that to be found on the Web today. While I'm proud of many of my posts, I believe the discussion of how Twitter relates to the work of Marshall McLuhan is my best and most cogent analysis.

One general clarification to be made and reiterated before departing: Twitter Backlash was not, nor never intended to be, a forum for anti-Twitter thought. It has been asserted here repeatedly that Twitter is a technology that, in of itself, is neither good nor evil. Rather, it is the way so many use this new technology that invites scorn and, by necessity, reflection. And that's what this little corner of the Web was meant to provide: reflection.

The Social Life of Twitter

The recently completed annual Urban Market Research survey, compiled by the Australian youth marketing agency, Lifelounge, found an increase in 16-30 year olds who have had enough of chatting online with friends. Instead, it is claimed, they want to spend more face-to-face time with them. This is believed to be a result of the current global recession.

The CEO of Lifelounge, referring to the youth of Australia, was quoted: "And they want more connections with their friends that aren't digital, that are tangible. They're starting to question the authenticity of social networks such as Facebook and Twitter."

In times of economic upheaval, members of an affected society are inevitably forced to reassess the way they are living. Items purchased that were once considered necessary are dropped by the wayside; activities that were a de facto part of one's routine are examined anew. The Great Recession, through which the world is currently suffering, is no different.

According to the aforementioned study, the recent, long-term trend of the youth, including teenagers, conducting one's social life via technology may finally be subsiding. Despite the overwhelming publicity garnered by Twitter and Facebook, there is nothing new about technology being used to maintain one's connections with others; the telephone is a primary example.

As both the fixed and variable costs of telephone service dropped in the 1970s and 1980s, the stereotype of the chatty teenager spending hours on calls with his or her friends became a snapshot of one's formative years. An argument can be made, however, that the telephone did not take the place of face-to-face contact, but rather augmented it. Long-distance calls were still expensive for most families, so contact was primarily confined to those one would see on a daily basis anyway.

The advent of email in the general population starting in the late 1990s provided another method to stay in touch with one's friends and loved ones. It's lack of instant communication, though, did not substantially change relationship dynamics. It did, however, allow friendships over great distances to be promulgated, something not yet available with the telephone.

Finally, with the introduction of instant messaging, texting, Facebook, and now Twitter, technology has become an integral aspect of relationships as opposed to simply a tool to communicate. The benefits of instant communication without the etiquette required on telephone calls now allow a connection with a greater number of people albeit usually one of a shallow nature.

The interesting aspect of the Lifelounge study is that teenagers are reverting to a behavior that they never embodied. Unlike an adult who can refer to past recessions as a reference and adjust their behavior accordingly, teenagers have less of a history upon which to draw.

But, perhaps spurred on my the sudden belt-tightening of this deep recession, the youth are discovering what is really important in life -- money can come and go, most often out of one's control, but true friendships can weather any storm. And if both ends of a friendship live near one another, why spend so much time in the exchange of electrons when a face-to-face encounter can mean so much more? Maybe this jump to in-person communication will be looked at as the new marker of adulthood and maturity.

Twitter: Comfortably Dumb

Dr. Tracy Alloway, from the University of Stirling in Scotland, claims that his research shows that using Twitter "diminishes intelligence." Specifically, she says that it weakens "working memory," which is the ability to remember information and to subsequently use it. Dr. Alloway also claims that working memory is far more important to success and happiness than one's IQ measurement.

''On Twitter you receive an endless stream of information, but it's also very succinct,'' said Dr. Alloway. ''You don't have to process that information. Your attention span is being reduced and you're not engaging your brain and improving nerve connections.''

Photo Credit: New Line CinemaWith the relentless strides made in technology over the last few generations, the flow and dissemination of information has increased exponentially. A distinction, however, needs to be made. A well-informed public does not necessarily indicate one that is better educated as the study by Dr. Alloway has found. Increasingly, the quality of information and its incessant assault on our senses render the general public less capable of knowledgeable decision making. This is epitomized by Twitter, but in reality, has manifested itself across various media as well.

Newspapers had been the primary source of news for almost two centuries, ever since the advent of affordable printing and distribution. While there are countless examples of sensationalism in print over the years, generally speaking, the daily newspaper provided the real estate to explore issues in-depth by educated and accredited journalists. Today, in a trend sparked by The USA Today and accelerated across the landscape due to the cost of newsprint, articles and essays are shortened with catchy pull quotes now the norm. Outside of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and a few other stalwarts, reasoned analysis has become harder to find in this medium.

The situation is similar with magazines, particularly the newsweeklies. In the past, Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News and World Report provided perspective on the events from the previous seven days. It enabled both the authors of its articles and its readers to take a step back and look anew at issues with, perhaps, a diminished amount of emotion and more nuance. Now, in an age where the daily newspaper is considered outdated, the newsweekly has become merely a shadow of what it once was. The quality of coverage of the most important issues of today has dropped along with their circulation numbers.

Television news, never a bastion of reasoned analysis, nonetheless used to offer a more educated take on daily events. Anchorpersons and television reporters were actually considered journalists, a term many would now use accompanied by a wink or a smirk. There are exceptions such as "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer" and "60 Minutes", but their audiences are increasingly older with the more recent generations hardly paying them any mind. One wonders if Edward R. Murrow would be telegenic enough in this day and age to secure any programming time.

News sources, if they can be described as such, on the World Wide Web continue down the road of the ever-shortening sound bite. The same media outlets referenced above now disseminate much of their news gathering through Twitter, providing a constant flow of information, usually condensed and hardly fact-checked. It is up to the general public to regard information gleaned from such sources with ever-increasing skepticism. Otherwise, public policy debates, such as the current one over health care, will be resolved, not based upon the most educated reasoning, but by arguments that are well-suited to 140 characters or less.