A year can’t go by now without some pundit, writer, or researcher weighing in on how the more technology infiltrates our lives, the lonelier we’ve become.
Stephen Marche, a novelist writing in the May 2012 Atlantic, weaves together a bunch of anecdotes to suggest that Facebook is making us lonelier.
Renowned MIT researcher Sherry Turkle, who bases her conclusions on an endless stream of in-vitro interviews with teens and young adults, suggested over the weekend in the New York Times that technology is certainly making us more connected… but those connections are more shallow and less rich that traditional face-to-face connections.
These are interesting observations, but are they offering us a false dichotomy? Or suggesting a causal relationship where none has yet been established?
Marche kicks off the false dichotomy argument by asking questions like:
The question of the future is this: Is Facebook part of the separating or part of the congregating; is it a huddling-together for warmth or a shuffling-away in pain?
Research has some answers to these questions, which Marche explores to some degree in his 5,344 word essay. What the data actually demonstrate is a fairly complicated relationship — one mediated by personality, psychological resilience, social factors, and frequency of use of the technology. It’s not going to be this nice, clean, black-and-white false dichotomy that so many writers yearn for.
In other words, it’s a dumb question to ask because the answer isn’t one that can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no.” Facebook has no more power to “make” us lonely than reading a book or watching television does.
Which is exactly what loneliness expert John Cacioppo tells Marche in the very same article:
Surely, I suggest to Cacioppo, this means that Facebook and the like inevitably make people lonelier. He disagrees. Facebook is merely a tool, he says, and like any tool, its effectiveness will depend on its user.
You can use a hammer to build a house or to bludgeon another human being. But nobody spends any time asking such thought-provoking questions like, “Are hammers making us become more murderous?”
Marche doesn’t let common sense or research data stop him from coming to his pre-determined conclusions, though:
What Facebook has revealed about human nature — and this is not a minor revelation — is that a connection is not the same thing as a bond, and that instant and total connection is no salvation, no ticket to a happier, better world or a more liberated version of humanity. […]
Facebook denies us a pleasure whose profundity we had underestimated: the chance to forget about ourselves for a while, the chance to disconnect.
Huh? Really?? Facebook just revealed that?
I think most of us were already in on this ground-breaking “revelation.” We knew that when the postal service made letter delivery more reliable, and people could send letters back and forth across thousands of miles. We learned that again when the telephone became commonplace, and we could instantly connect with anyone else in the world, just by dialing a set of numbers on a small electronic device.
Besides, I have to ask, who was going around really believing that Facebook is the means a person would turn to in order to find greater happiness? It’s simply like the telephone of old… Allowing us to connect and re-connect with others in a simple, often — but not always nor exclusively — brief manner.
Last, tools can’t deny you anything. A hammer doesn’t deny your using it to build a house, any more than it denies your using it to murder another human being. These are choices that only people — rational, thinking human beings — can make. Pushing off the blame onto the technology itself is irrational and problematic. If you want to disconnect, just do so. If you want to read a book, just do so. If you want not to be on Facebook, log off.
Connections Don’t Equal Meaningful Conversation
Sherry Turkle repeats the argument, by and large, suggesting that many of us have confused being connected — through social networks like Facebook — to having meaningful connections. It’s a subtle but potentially important differentiation.
In the silence of connection, people are comforted by being in touch with a lot of people — carefully kept at bay. We can’t get enough of one another if we can use technology to keep one another at distances we can control: not too close, not too far, just right. I think of it as a Goldilocks effect.
Texting and e-mail and posting let us present the self we want to be. This means we can edit. And if we wish to, we can delete. Or retouch: the voice, the flesh, the face, the body. Not too much, not too little — just right.
Human relationships are rich; they’re messy and demanding. We have learned the habit of cleaning them up with technology. And the move from conversation to connection is part of this. But it’s a process in which we shortchange ourselves. Worse, it seems that over time we stop caring, we forget that there is a difference.
But again, it’s painting a picture of a world where it’s either one or the other — online or face-to-face. ((I can’t help but wonder if this is just an old journalistic device trotted out on a regular basis by the best of writers just to help turn page views, just as its been done for centuries to sell newspapers and other media. After all, it takes little imagination or effort to suggest a simple evil is the root of people’s unhappiness. It takes far more effort and time to explain the complicated, subtle relationships occurring. Oddly, Marche does a lot of the good explaining, but then negates all the research data and expert opinion with his own opinion at the end of the piece. )) But the latest generations of kids are growing up in a world where the two meld together largely as one, where people are using the technology as a way to connect with their real-world peers on a daily basis.
Such technological connections don’t at all preclude real-life conversations. If we’re not having them, it’s because that’s our choice — the technology isn’t choosing for us. Telephones haven’t become less prevalent (if anything, the opposite is true because of mobile phone use). We’re simply choosing to use them less as audio devices.
What we’re witnessing is the rise of new technologies helping to mold and change the way people interact with one another, sometimes in some very fundamental ways. Just as the automobile did. Just as the radio did. Just as the telephone did. Just as television did. And so on…
But then some people suggest that because these ways are different than what they are used to, they are automatically worse. That’s where the problems begin. Different doesn’t automatically equal bad, and without quantifiable measures, all you have is a subjective lens in which to conduct your measurements. (Turkle, unfortunately, doesn’t use much quantifiable data to reach her conclusions.)
Closing Thoughts
It’s true — I, like many people online, don’t engage in long, drawn-out conversations with others — friends, family or colleagues. But what I do do is something I couldn’t do easily two decades ago — keep connected with a social circle of hundreds.
This doesn’t stop me from having those in-depth, face-to-face conversations, or put them off. I’m under no illusion (or delusion) that having a social networking circle of hundreds or thousands makes me more social. Perhaps I’m alone in believing that, but I don’t think so.
I think most of use services like Facebook, Twitter and the rest as the tools they are. We use them to help schedule face-to-face time, keep up with our friends who no longer live nearby, and stay somewhat connected with them.
When I spend time with my technologically-connected and savvy nephews and nieces, we put away the technology to spend some time together. Or we use it to engage in shared activities (like video games) — something adults and kids have been doing without ill effect for decades.
The connection is indeed different than it was decades ago. Decades from now, it will be different again. Whether those connections are weaker or stronger is entirely up to the individual who uses the tools.
For Further Reading
Is Facebook Making us Lonely? – Stephen Marche
The Flight from Conversation – Sherry Turkle
6 comments
Hmmmm..I agree that this is a complicated topic. As an inveterate Facebook user and e-mailer, and as someone who isn’t always very good at making new F2F connections with people, I have found that Facebook has actually helped my social life by letting me know about events that my friends are attending, even if I don’t connect with those people very much offline. Then I go to the event and have face-to-face connections with them. I’ve noticed also that in the times when I’m lonely or am feeling liking isolating myself, Facebook helps me feel connected even when I don’t have the wherewithal or the will to go out and connect deeply with people F2F. If I put a message out there saying “I really need some love right now”, I’m guaranteed to get several people reaching out to me, even if don’t really feel like reaching out to others. If it weren’t for technology at these times, I probably wouldn’t reach out to anyone. More people are aware of some of the things I’m experiencing, and thus can offer support (and vice versa). I’ve had Facebook IM conversations with people I’ve never even met when I’ve indicated that I’m struggling (and vice versa) and these connections seem as deep to me as ones I have with F2F friends ( I mean it’s basically the same as talking to someone on the phone). I certainly don’t mistake most of my Facebook “friends” for “real” friends, though I do have one more thing in common with Facebook friends if I want to connect more with them on a F2F level. I don’t think you can make any sweeping generalizations about technology and how it effects social connection. How we connect depends on who we were already, before we started interacting with the technology. Personally, I feel like all this “OMG (!), Facebook is ruining our society” stuff is just people trying to get attention. Most of the time they don’t seem to be that familiar with how this technology actually works, socially. I usually just roll my eyes and wonder whether people said the same thing when the telephone became commonplace.
Great article which brings attention to a real problem with today’s children and youth…
As a child psychiatrist, we are seeing an apparent increases in children and youth with problems with anxiety, depression and suicide. One scary statistic — compared to the 1950’s and 1960’s, the suicide rate in Canada has increased 3-4X.
Why is this happening?
Strong attachments (i.e. connections and relationships) between children and nurturing adult caregivers (i.e. PARENTS) has been shown by numerous students to be the single most important resiliency factor for a person’s mental health.
So why are we seeing so many children and youth who are vulnerable?
The problem with today’s ‘Generation Me’ is that (through no fault of their own), they have more weak connections than ever with their parents, who are more and more busy working than ever. And they are spending more time than ever in front of computer screens, technology, or connecting with friends.
The problem however, is that peers can never meet your emotional/attachment/relationship needs as well as only parents can. Peers, through no fault of their own, are going through their own issues, are still developing, and can only meet so much of a child’s needs.
Technology plays a role with all of this, because it appears that the MISUSE of technology is weakening 1) children’s relationships with parents, and 2) children’s relationships with peers…
We need to understand more about the technology and learn SAFE WAYS how to use it. As the ‘hammer’ mentioned in the article, there are both safe and unsafe ways to use a hammer…
Michael from Ottawa
facebook, has made me all that much more aware of not having grown up with real friends. i don’t have close family either. it has shown itself to be a magnifying lense, for my sense of desolation. as a man, this is awkward,because it fits the bill for patterns of behavior for people, who at times go bonkers in society. so, it’s not something i can talk about, lest people think i’m crazy, and by extention potentially violent. i rarely know any of the people that the system suggests,i may know. that just pours salt on the wound. i think the internet in general, can very much magnify what is already a dominant component of ones life. i really wonder, how many introverted lonely people, feel any less so, because of the internet or facebook.
Facebook is a great way to keep in touch with your friends, to keep up with their activities and whereabouts. Interacting with others on there is fun also. For some, people can go all day posting and talking about stuff. And there are some people that post one sentence and everyone gets annoyed by it. A whole wide variety of people with different observations will read and scrutinize every word, letter and number in that sentence and will find a way to make you a problem for society. Such as one subject will be viewed in another way, meaning he or she read this but I thought of something else. For example: I had pizza for lunch. Someone else will read it as relating it to an explicit activity. Rumors like that will always get started.
So its not really a problem with facebook. I think its some peoples level of maturity, their position in life, things they have or dont have, etc.
But getting back to the topic of your article, does facebook make you lonelier? To me it doesnt, but if youre in situations as the above, socializing can be expensive in the cost of your reputation.