Do gadgets contribute to our transformation into sociopaths or, on the contrary, strengthen our social relationships?
View from a different perspective © Rosângela Ludovico
Repeatedly I caught myself thinking that I almost forgot what it was like to live and interact with other people without a smartphone or tablet at hand. Not to say that the commodification of mobile phones and smartphones has become something sudden and unexpected, perhaps at some stage we began to take them for granted and stopped giving account of the speed of the industry development. On the other hand, it was this development that predetermined the nature of communication with gadgets, which in fact became tools for consuming content from various services and social interaction with interesting people in social networks, messengers, on thematic forums, the list goes on.
By the nature of my main activity, I am constantly in contact with the flow of people, so I often involuntarily observe how they communicate, how they behave in society, how they behave in certain social situations. Five years ago, when I was still living in an average provincial center, I was struck by the case when four members of the same family, during 20 minutes of being in each other's company in a public place, did not exchange a word, staring at the phone screens. The first reaction was surprise, but then I looked at myself from the outside and realized that in fact I was no different from these people, maybe even more attached to life on the Internet. Years have passed, no one raises their eyebrows in surprise, observing such behavior, but the question still remains: do gadgets make us less sociable, more withdrawn in ourselves?
The loneliness of a big city
The larger the crowd, the more lonely a person feels. And we are talking about an ordinary person, what can we say about those who are experiencing some kind of mental disorder or a temporary condition associated with a violation of the perception of social behavior and society as a whole. Mobile electronics quickly became a kind of shield that helps to distract from the noise of the streets, a faceless string of faces and eyes, somehow brighten up routine trips to and from work. It all started with portable music players, I remember well this time when pedestrians-music lovers were so carried away by the unusual scenario of listening to music on the go that they stopped giving an account of what was happening around, crashing into other people, crossing the road at a red traffic light, etc. .
Is it bad that we 'freeze' on the screen in public transport, a cafe, standing in line to board an airplane or at a supermarket checkout? Not at all, on the contrary, gadgets act here as a way to distract yourself and learn something new and interesting. It's another matter when we stop noticing everything that is happening around and thereby ignore those situations in which we should have acted differently. A satirical sticker from the London Underground illustrates one of them: 'Put headphones in your ears or go deep into your phone so as not to give way to people with disabilities, passengers with children and pregnant women.' In this, of course, the big city has a bad influence on us, pushing us to non-observance of elementary rules of decency. It should be understood that gadgets are only a tool, decisions are made by a person, and it is wrong to blame smartphones for not giving way to an elderly person, the person directly sitting is to blame, regardless of whether he consciously ignores what is happening around him or not.
Respect the loneliness of the big city
As for the abuse of devices in public places, I somewhat understand people who take offense at their friends, relatives and colleagues who prefer the world on the other side of the screen to talking with them. But again, we cannot know all the circumstances. Outside of a specific situational context, when certain rules of behavior are in force, scenarios are completely different. A bad day, poor health, and in the end the banal awkwardness of the situation – and the person quite reasonably resorts to the method of communication / receiving information that suits him / her at the moment. Why? To overcome your shyness or calm down, collect your thoughts and not say too much, offending a real interlocutor. So why not just ask your counterpart why he prefers the screen to a living person? At the very least, there is a possibility of getting an answer, after which there will be no need to think out and build often incorrect conjectures.
Social media
Let's consider this point on the familiar to many example with Facebook. After the company bought the service Instagram, the chronicle more often began to flash photos of people from the list of friends, posted by them within the framework of the mentioned service, as well as numerous hints that it would be nice for you, my friend, to join your 155 (? ) with friends Facebook and create your own account. Again, my attitude to photography is neutral-negative, I take pictures with reluctance, just like I photograph, so I am still not there. Speaking about the photos of other users: as in any work, I appreciate the idea and non-standard approach, humor and the ability to present an idea. And at this point, the opinions of users are divided. Countless images of burgers, cats and sunburned knees from beaches from all over the world merge into one big information stream, forcing some to put hearts in concentration, others pour out streams of negativity towards the authors, in their opinion, clogging their feed.
Sorry, so why are you reading these people? I absolutely honestly tell my good friends that, for example, I can unsubscribe from them on Facebook / in Twitter, so as not to see notifications from Instagram, which may well distract me from more interesting and relevant content for me personally. And we communicate without any offense in messengers, in video chats and live and share those photos that we consider necessary at the moment when there is a discussion of a particular topic, whether it’s a vacation or someone who spent the weekend. At the moment, all my friends who use Instagram are hidden from the feed Facebook. At the same time, we remain friends in real life and are always aware of all events.
But lashing out at the user with angry tirades? On a social network? Yes, his account has a lot of photos of food from the restaurant. Maybe this is a way to preserve the moment the chef worked hard for putting together the dish? Maybe the chef will later be pleased to find the fruits of his labors by hashtags and show them to colleagues? From the experience of translating technological charts of one of the American Michelin restaurants, I can say that often the serving is paid no less attention than the cooking process itself. Or maybe a specific user makes money from their photos from different countries? There are an infinite number of scenarios, and if there is no understanding of this, and in return there is a negative reaction, then there is a certain conclusion: it is difficult for you to perceive how others enjoy life, love their business and, yes, make money on it. This approach cannot be called constructive, either do not follow the person, or restrain yourself in the comments. And you certainly shouldn't criticize, humiliate the author, make decisions not for you, so there is no reason to waste nerve cells when the way out of the situation is just a couple of clicks. Or are you a bored troll?
'But before the sun was brighter ..'
'.. the foliage is greener, there is more air, the milk is cheaper,' and so on. Often, people who are inclined to romanticize the past and / or do not want to accept (and understand) something new, echoing some kind of internal protest, adhere to a negative position in relation to the widespread penetration of new technologies. “But before, people in transport communicated with each other, and did not stick around in smartphones!” – says a nostalgic critic of mobile electronics.
Sociable people from the past
That is, if you draw a logical conclusion from such a statement, then before did people in megacities absolutely accidentally talk to the first person they met on a randomly chosen topic? Utopia, don't you think? Yes, I have often come across examples of such interactions in villages, villages and very small urban-type settlements, where everyone literally knows each other by sight and where the simple-minded character of people neutralizes the social conventions habitual for a city dweller, causing dissonance in the latter. But in the city? I cannot imagine such a situation in the same transport, for example. What is hidden behind the negativity of such Luddites? Rejection of the new as the fear of losing control of your own life? Overblown prejudices and prejudices? Hatred and envy of the younger generation, who can easily meet and connect with people through the network? There may be other reasons, but none of these points seems adequate to me, especially when it comes to an adult, accomplished person.
It is worth looking at the other side of the technology coin. Progress has allowed us to learn, communicate, meet new interesting people from all over the world, look for and provide work, find a way out of difficult life episodes, solve our own and other people's problems, help and receive help – and all this by pressing a button or a screen. The speed of transmission and processing of information, in turn, accelerates scientific progress, is it really bad? No one will return to carrier pigeons and notes on birch bark. Of course, I'm exaggerating.
But..
Yes, there are negative aspects. Modern users, of course, sin by pulling out their smartphone on business and without at the most inopportune moment, it seems that you can talk endlessly about mobile etiquette. And the point is not even that gadget lovers cannot sit quietly for an hour and a half at the cinema without flipping through the news and messages a couple of times. In my opinion, the main negative impact of social networks is in a kind of dependence on likes and comments as evidence that a person is recognized and approved by a narrow circle of his acquaintances on the network. Of course, it is not worth saying that people everywhere have become narcissists and rely only on external influence, but in the pursuit of this approval, people's behavior also changes.
Ideal audience © Yondr
Real public © altpress.com
For example, a forest of hands filming a live performance of a popular artist on their phones. Behind the beautiful picture with many glowing screens at concerts is one curious aspect: people began to pay more attention to the process of recording their visual impressions in real time, rather than getting full impressions, albeit fleeting. I'm not talking about professional videographers, but about the monotonous numerous videos from shaking hands, tripods or selfie sticks with terrible sound. It would seem that what is easier – took a ticket to the VIP sector, put the phone on a tripod and shoot at least the whole concert, even from one point, but exactly. Better yet, wait for the recording with decent quality. But, apparently, the desire to get a dozen or two “thumbs up” on YouTube is a stronger incentive.
Conclusion
I don't think that the problem with gadgets is that users become unsociable, communicate less and drop out of society. Electronic devices are just tools that have become an everyday reality, but how people use them and how they behave at the same time is the lot of people themselves and their peculiarities of perception. The main thing is that it doesn't become an inconvenience and doesn't turn into a problem for other people. As for nostalgia for times without devices – yes, I confess, it happens, sometimes I get tired of the abundance of information around, including from the screen of mobile devices. But this does not mean that it would be better without all this. By analogy with AR, gadgets do not replace real communication, they complement and improve it, direct it to a more interesting channel for a particular user. Everyone chooses their own way of interacting with them, and if it is not aimed at harm to other users, then there can be no complaints against him. And, of course, everything has its limit, you shouldn't immerse yourself in the screen too much, nobody canceled harm to yourself either.