Irrational Connection: Always Connected, Never Connected

Why are we so fascinated with the notion of instant, easy connection? I understand the driving needs of the driven to stay connected on the business side of the equation, although I must admit that for years I did my best to avoid being reachable 24x7.

Eventually I succumbed and now carry my ubiquitous Blackberry everywhere I go.

From my vantage point, it looks to me like the American fascination with quick and easy is in constant evolution. A more cynical view would say it is in a constant state of mutation.

Remember the quick and easy road to riches promised in the dot com era? As an Associate Partner at Andersen Consulting -- today's Accenture -- I had a front row seat witnessing firsthand the heyday of dot com mania.

I recall all too well the hubris of the then 20 and 30-something crowd who claimed that this market was different, that the internet era would be spared the vagaries of traditional markets, and that a new reality was emerging which would lay waste to old school notions of underlying value and economic performance. Even the 40-something's were caught up in the "this time it's different" thinking.

They were right about one thing: the course of business was being radically reshaped, right along with just about everything else we thought we knew about how people would interact with one another. The internet was, in fact, a game changer. The coolest thing about the internet was the exponential acceleration of the information age and the ability to connect with people in unique and interesting ways.

It seems that our fascination with quick and easy remains alive and well, if perhaps redirected in potentially interesting and unsatisfying ways.

May I present Social Networking. It's as though the quick and easy way to fulfillment shifted from stocks, houses and excessive compensation to the quick and easy fulfillment of instant connection, facilitated by friends lists, texting and 140 character Tweets.

What's the Appeal of Social Networking Anyway?

I know I have my Facebook, LinkedIn, and Plaxo accounts and occasionally I play with Twitter. I have four websites and blog regularly. Can't risk not being connected. But am I really connected?

And what's the frenzied fascination with social networking all about, really? What feeds the voracious appetite for connection amongst our newer generations, and why is it spilling over to the 50+ crowd as well?

Perhaps it is so important because we have very little of it these days.

Heads buried in email, long hours, and unending demands to produce even more have contributed to a sense of isolation and disconnect. Schools which used to have a focus on social skills as well as basic learning, now resemble anything from an armed camp to social isolation chambers.

How's this for a sign of the times:

Connecticut School Bans Physical Contact: East Shore M.S. Outlaws "High-Fives," "Hugging" And Horseplay Of Any Kind; Violators May Face Expulsion

Now isn't that just great! Touching is illegal! One of the most basic, natural and important aspects of human connection is now grounds for expulsion? For crying out loud, are these educators even connected to the human race?

Post WWII, an experiment was conducted on what would happen if you raised newborn infants absent of direct human touch. Those babies either died or wound up in mental institutions. Such experiments were outlawed as a result. All kinds of research underscores role of human touch in various aspects of well being, and yet now we have schools banning it altogether.

Mommies line up in their SUV's so junior won't have to risk walking home with friends, and schools are increasingly cracking down on contact between kids. I understand the very real concerns about safety these days, and yet the rush to protect seems to be creating even more distance between people.

Communication skills seem to be dropping rapidly and rarely does anyone get anything meaningful about how to connect with others, how to talk through difficult issues, or how to deal with life challenges.

Want a different window into today's schooling challenge, what teachers can do about it, and also get a dose of understanding about why Facebook, Twitter and all manner of Social Networking matter? Watch this video:

Always Connected But Never Really Connecting

It seems to me that we are rapidly learning to substitute what we really need -- warm, intimate, in-depth connection and communication -- with symbols of being connected. It's as though exchanging enough IM's, text messages, blogs, Tweets, or "what I'm doing now" updates, we will somehow be closer to one another.

Eric Hoffer, the longshoreman philosopher who passed away in 1983, might have been predicting the flood of email, text and IM's when he said: "You can never get enough of what you don't truly need."

Real life happens in the spaces between blog posts, email and SMS's. Tweets are supposed to fill in those spaces with short, simple, easy to digest bits of information about what your friends are up to. If you can't say it 140 characters, it must not be worth saying.

Part of the allure is that you are theoretically learning things about family, friends and co-workers that you didn't know, as though breakfast choices or current tunes on the IPOD actually matter. Now why do you suppose that is?

Could it be that we aren't actually spending time with our friends? Could it be that when we do, we are more likely to be texting someone else than connecting with the person in front of us - who is just as likely to interrupt any attempt at in person, real life connection with their own text, Tweet, or IM?

Next week, we'll look even deeper into the Social Networking phenomenon. Is this one sustainable or will we see these tools fall by the wayside like so many before them?

***

You can find out more about Russell Bishop at http://www.lessonsinthekeyoflife.com. Contact Russell at: [e-mail].

The author of Lessons in the Key of Life, Russell is an Educational Psychologist, professional life coach and management consultant, based in Santa Barbara California.

Comments

[PeterOswald]

I really didn’t want to join Facebook but did so at the suggestion of a 30-something friend of mine. I’m 45 and tech savvy, but Social Networking always seemed to be a waste of time and something that only the younger generation could find much meaning in. I’ve been on it about two weeks, and I still have mixed feelings.
I’ve stayed in touch with family members who are spread out across the world and reconnected with old friends. I’ve exchanged inside jokes with a friend who moved away and found out another has had five kids since I last saw her.
Agreed, Facebook texting and other networking tools are a clever way to stay in touch and share your life with others, but doesn’t it get to the point where it’s all just a shallow and narcissistic exercise? When I see students in the university town where I live talking on cell phones while on a bicycle or even a scooter, for chrissakes, or texting while crossing a busy street, it makes me just shake my head.
Social Networking is like an itch that has to be scratched. It’s like how my 16-year-old niece will text with someone else while at the dinner table with family. Her phone constantly buzzes, and she has to answer the buzz. She presses a few buttons hardly breaking eye contact with you, and that’s that. Another circuit completed. Another meaningless moment broadcast.
http://peteroswald.wordpress.com/

[politicsmatter]

Thank you for saying this. I have had several conversations in recent months about the connected and rude in our society. I actually made the same statement in regards to those who sit with a person and text someone else the entire time. I believe strongly in social connection and this highly technological society that has been created is missing out on a lot. They break appointments and relationships through texting. Etiquette has gone out the window and all that is left is people who spend their time concerned about themselves. I would love the possibilities of this new age; if it weren't for the production of narcissistic, arrogant, materialistic and inconsiderate people that is left in its wake. May the up and coming have an epiphany and find balance.

[Jonni Rae]

It started with ATM machines and the Walkman. Then the phone "menu." The self-checkout at the supermarket. You can go all day without having to talk to a single soul. I used to wonder why people would just be walking down the street with a walkman on -- why block out the sounds around you? Why not get the full experience? Then cellphones replaced that, i-pods, whatever..­.I think it is fear, really. We went to big tanks, hummers and SUVS. Defensive driving. During the 60's there was a life "out there," on the street, really, in people's houses, conversations and discoveries of a different interconnected kind. Somewhere we became afraid of each other, of passion, of our own human frailty maybe. I don't know. But my best friend back when it all started wanted to print t-shirts that said "ANTI-TECH­." I thought he was over reacting, but now I kind of agree. I am always so relieved when I can get an actual person on the phone. When I get into a conversation with a stranger at the supermarket, when I can interact with a human. Can you relate?

[kape]

Your blog is touching on some interesting, infrequently explored topics in these days of social networking lemmings. I wince every time I hear "community," "friend," and "brand yourself" in this context.

You are on the right track in beginning to link the phenomenon of social networking with what has been going on in American society these past decades. We are in a society where corporate work is intruding ever more into the realm and time of private existence in return for less and less of things that matter for a rich life, e.g. free time, community involvement, family, friendship, stability, health care and security and dignity in old age. Social networking (along with materialism) is a sort of "opiate of the masses," giving the illusion of connectedness that has been robbed from us. We celebrate the lack of opportunity to realize this part of ourselves and our society and tell some of our most talented young people that they have to give up their "life" to have a career in today's world -- but there is always time for 140 characters, so everything is cool!

[mckinley]

There are probably 2 kinds of people who gravitate toward online connectivity --

Those who are already sociable, and are good at and thoroughly enjoy connecting with others - who use it as an adjunct to their already boisterous social life.

And those who lack social skills and "normal" interaction and human connection - who, even just 10 years ago, would have been just sitting at home watching TV and reading. Whose interaction with the world revolved around going to the corner store ever couple days -- The otherwise anonymous.

I am more comfortable - and more skilled - with the written word than in speaking, especially face-to-face. (although I am pleasant and intelligent in person and do not lack in social skills, and I hold down an office job where I do a lot of interaction).

The online world - although it is in some respects not "real" and I know that - has probably kept me sane.

[Johnagain]

I tell my students in lectures that if I hear a cell phone or smart phone go off (for a call or IM, text message, whatever), I'll smash it with a hammer. So far I haven't had to resort to following through with this, probably because I teach grad students and medical students, who are a little past the adolescent compulsive stage, and are more serious about learning.

[grayforester]

I was more isolated before Facebook. I'm meeting more people in real space since Facebook, partly through Facebook, part via Domino effect from those person to person events. It helps a lot once you're too old and careworn to go hang out all the time.

[SarcasticFringehead]

A thought provoking blog, Mr. Bishop.
I have mixed feelings about all this, partly because I'm standing on the edge of this always-bei­ng-connect­ed business and hesitate to move into it more. For one thing, I don't even have a cell phone, which when I tell people this, they react as if I've told them I don't use indoor plumbing or electricity. I am computer literate and post comments here and there on the internet, but I avoid FaceBook and it's offspring.
Perhaps it has to do with age -- I'm 51. But I like to think it's more of a question of priorities. I tend to think that this twitter, texting, IM and incessant cellphone usage phenomenon, is more of a distraction that anything else. People are completely removing themselves from the present moment and are lost in a thought world of disembodied minds. I've been struggling to go the opposite way -- to become more embodied and alive in the present moment, so this is where my resistance lies.
It's good to communicate with people, but are you really saying anything worthwhile, or are you just distracting yourself? Are you connecting with others or just relieving your boredom and angst?
Perhaps you will reveal more answers to my question in future blogs.

[pneuma7]

Thank you. Looking forward to the next post in this series.

[Drhank]

Hey Russ,
Quite the contrary-facebook, blogs, emails, blackberrys are actually rational connections! One of the many things I learned in writing The Genius of Instinct is that you-me-and everyone else are hardwired to socially connect with people. Evolutionary sciences and neurosciences now confirm that the brain has evolved as a social connector so it is not surprising that people have taken advantage of technology to facilitate what the brain tells us to do. Remember, the use of technology to connect is universal. Indeed, it could be said that the companies that make these "social connecting" devices are exploiting our human nature.
With this in mind, however, also know that we are hardwired to connect with groups that are approximately 150 in size, a size similar to the clans of our ancestors. Consider how many people are on your facebook, and other network systems. I would, based on evolutionary psychology, suggest that anything over 150 individuals loses values (except for marketing purposes). I would invite people to think about how the size of thier network impacts the quality and quantity of information and would also be interested in the number of people individuals connect to, and, when is enoug, enough, if ever. I would also hypothesize that people are more likely to use thier cameras in their computers when speaking with thier family or close friends, rather than some one they are "superficially connected.
Good theme to write about, Russ!

[Russell Bishop - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Hank:

not sure if I'm understanding you here. I understand the 150 person circle; are you suggesting that social networking is creating genuine or authentic connection? Genuine or authentic relationship?

[Drhank]

Hi Russ,
I am suggesting that the actual communictions, might lead to deep social connections, as in on line dating, but the short instant communications are more of what I would call "passing or elevator communicat­ions." From my perspective, authentic communication is exchanging thougts and feelings and so much of this communication involves face-face communication as well as deep levels of trust. I don't see facebook, twitter, communicatins operating at that level. Indeed, many studies are beginning to show that people, especially high school age, who mostly communicate electronically are stressed when they have to communicate face to face, especially when problems are discussed. I would be interested if you asked readers, that for an emotional crisis, would they rather speak to someone or email them, let alone, communicate on facebook.

[Ed and Deb Shapiro - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Russell- Great blog!

As for the touching ban it is ridiculous.

An animal baby needs to be licked by it's mother to stimulate it's bodily function. Human babies need to be touched to know they are safe, secure and loved.

Wishing you well,

Ed

[Sanford Dickert]

This is a wonderful blog post. Here here.

[Moshe]

With all due respect, the American People seem to have lost their minds, trading their personal thought and reflection for constant mostly meaninghless external audio/visual input; and mistaking being constantly connected for actually doing something worthwhile.

And what people are actually getting in return for giving up their privacy and most of the waking hours, seems to be a cell-phone induced form of Attention Deficit Disorder resulting in consequences ranging from wreckless driving to a growing disconnect from reality.

Please, consider turning off the phone folks, or at least while you are driving. If you are going to ruin your own life with your 24/7 cell phone/crackberry addiction, that is very sad, but please try not to kill anyone else in the process . . .

[feyangel]

Follow-up thoughts: One thing that has disturbed me deeply about on-line connecting were two times when people posted quasi-suicidal comments. One was someone I had only accepted as a friend because they asked me to after noting I was part of a particular group. The other was a casual musician friend of mine in a funk, who thought no one would notice his posting of suicidal contemplations. I commented back to both people, urging them to reach out to REAL PEOPLE IN THE REAL WORLD. To my musician friend, I offered a phone number, private email address-- and some back-and-forth conversation. I didn’t mind doing this—but/and, personally, I also felt "violated" to go to an on-line place I go to for fun and then being greeted by such unexpected & extreme pain and crisis. Though, as a "minister" & human being I felt compelled to respond with loving & support, I was also deeply saddened that those people-- as with others I have read about-- either had no REAL connections-- or they confused on-line stuff for real connections-- or they felt so disconnected they felt no one would even notice their postings. Somehow, I think it is important for on-line sites like MS & FB & Twitter & etc. to be clarified as forms of entertainment and even casual "conversation"—but certainly they are no substitute for real human connections.

[pauw]

I believe that this explosion in relatively meaningless interaction on the internet will settle down to a more healthy level in the near future. Admittedly I have a limited experience set. I grew up when the only way of social interaction on the web was via internet forums or email. I used to frequent forums to such an extent that I was a moderator for a tech help section of a rather large forum. During my time there people came and went in cycles–usually referred to the person "burning out" but the more apt description would probably be they got bored. I think what draws people in is the new car smell, in a way. It's new and lots of people are doing it plus it is relatively instant gratification. Most people will find that the more vapid interactions grow dull over time, as with any interaction. Basically, I think there is a lot of alarm going on here over a fad. It's like tamagotchi but using higher tech. I think if people stopped over reacting (in both directions) this fad would probably cycle out much faster. That mostly requires understanding the human drives that result in the fads, which is unlikely to happen. lol