Do social networks make us 'less human'?

I hate, with a passion, social networking sites. It's disgusting that it's almost socially unacceptable not to be on FB. And frankly yes i think it's isolating people, i'm sick and tired of having a pint with some mates and every 10 seconds one of them has to check their phone to see if whoever they're stalking today has changed their status or poked them or whatever nonsence it is.
Everyone is more connected than ever, but we've never been so alone. Instead of 8-9 close friends everyone has 300 people they don't really know. I'm all for technology, i'm by no means a technophobe. I refuse to bow to social pressure to get an account, some people are visibly stunned when they find out i don't have one. Like the thought of a fellow 18 year old not being on FB is some kind of Heresy.
Why is it necessary? It just doesn't make sence to me, maybe it's becuase of the simple fact that i honestly don't care. I don't care if you've just had a picnic up a hill, i don't care if you're relationship is now "complicated" i don't care what pictures whatsherface has of her holiday to Japan and i don't care if that matey "liked" something. Why does everyone else? At first i thought it was just arrogance to assume that everyone is interested in what you've done to the point they go online and find out. Turns out everyones that shallow.

Is there any science behind any of these assertions?

"Does social networking bring people together or isolate them?"

I'd be surprised if it didn't do both. The questions are (1) what does it do more of - isolate or bring together; and (2) is either harmful to (a) the individual or (b) society.

As the saying goes, the plural of anecdote isn't data. So do we have data on these questions or is it just a bunch of people with opinions, armed perhaps with anecdotes?

Facebook like most things in life it's all about moderation and we need to be a were of the signs of addiction and not let Facebook control us.

The beauty of Facebook is that it has taken all these networked computers and used them to network humanity .


David Adelaide Aust

Technology is a tool like any other. How it is used, is up to us; anything from raising a virtual farm to organising revolutions in Tunisia.
I always felt it added to social interaction (or filled in the gaps) rather than replaced it.

I think social networking bring people together in a none physical way. Isolation comes in when one of the friends stop talking which is actually the result of the distant between the two. The sense of being together which social networking suppose to promote is broken by the unwilling action of one of the friends to maintain the contact or respond to the contact being initiated by the willing friend.

Again with the missed question. Is "bringing people together" a good or bad idea. To the "newlywed" couple who reconnected after so many years because they lost touch, "bringing people together" is a good idea. However, to the two destroyed families that resulted from this "reconnection" as the two lost loves thought only of themselves and not their kids, spouses they had committed to, and their extend "real" social network, "bringing closer together" was a catastrophic event.

There is no doubt that things like FB open lines of communication that wouldn't be there otherwise. But these lines are different because they are removed from physical presence and repercussions. As a narcissistic, egotistical personality who has grown to worship Freud, Face Book is a great playground.

I think, both things are happening. When I am on public transport or walk about the town, there are many people either talking on their mobile phones or checking whatsoever on their smart phones. In fact mostly they don't even realise what is going on next to them, they are not (mentally) where they are (geographically), as it were.
On the other hand for me there is a great benefit from several very useful sites, which connect people globally. I experienced that you really can bring friendships into being by certain online services.
I don't use facebook a lot, because there is very little use for me. But I am using a service e.g. which is about learning languages, and there I got into contact with many most interesting people from all parts of the world.
The site functions similarly to facebook. It can be accessed without paying for it. This is a huge advantage for people who are living in poorer countries or who don't have money, if they have got at least access to the internet.
There is also an access to the language site, which you have to pay for, getting more features. And I think that people from richer countries thus do finance this service for others. Anyway, the site works also on the principle of mutual help. I.e. native speakers help to correct the exercises of the learners. And if you don't communicate with others, you will scarcely get the help from the other learners.
So I find this language site as well as other services on the web really great! Wonderful possibilities which didn't exist before.

I can't imagine a bigger self-deceit or delusion than to suppose that the social networks have done much (in real terms) to advance 'real' human interaction.Hey, lets cut the chase, what really is human interaction when "one-on-one" social skills are shriveling away everyday right before our eyes? I've sat next to pretty blondes at airport lounges watching them merrily punch away and giggle with whoever is at the other end, but who turn dead-cold eyes my way for just saying 'hullo'. And I'm not such a bad looking fellar. I've got friends who twiddle all day on their cellphones and devote hours to Facebook, Blackberry or 2Go-Interactive but who can't get an intelligent word in on a discussion among friends. Its so ruddy sad.

Well at the very least, social-networking probably does insulate those who do from those who don't. I've never considered I've made a friend via internet communication; but I suspect those more actively engaged believe they've done so. It certainly has widened many folks' contact with the global population. It remains to be seen whether this will be of positive benefit.
g

From the proveable experience, it had given the voiceless the sound to be heard even beyond the proxy domain of the individual locality.Perhap, the emergence of the series of social networking platform had made it possible to keep together unknown relationship of peoples who wouldn't have been contacted if the tech is not in place while it makes alot of marketing at which interested people were awared and creat more jobs for the net surfers.Taking from the other side prooved by prof. Sherry, it elemenate the need of having a real interaction which affect the level of caring among friends and familys of todays

Re: technology is threatening to dominate our lives and make us less human. Under the illusion of allowing us to communicate better, it is actually isolating us from real human interactions in a cyber-reality that is a poor imitation of the real world.

I agree. Technology can be a wonderful tool, but that is all it should be. It should never replace real human interaction. We have people who are living primarly through websites like Facebook, sleazy web forums, and etc. which prevents them from connecting with others on the most basic level. The main component to them is superficiality. At least with email, there is one on one interaction between 2 individuals.

Re: Simone Back

The fact that this woman had 1,048 so called FB "friends" and not 1 showed the genuine concern to go and check on her when she posted a suicide note is terrible. Instead, they posted mean messages on her status saying she just wanted attention. If these individuals were real friends; cry for "attention" or not, why not pick up the phone or go and check on her? That's what a real friend would have done.

Re: Again with the missed question. Is "bringing people together" a good or bad idea. To the "newlywed" couple who reconnected after so many years because they lost touch, "bringing people together" is a good idea. However, to the two destroyed families that resulted from this "reconnection" as the two lost loves thought only of themselves and not their kids, spouses they had committed to, and their extend "real" social network, "bringing closer together" was a catastrophic event.

I think this was a missed question that deserves attention. Bringing together people can be good or bad; depending on which side of the receiving line you are on. As wonderful as it is for the couple who reconnected imagine being the families that are torn apart in the process.

Its too easy to disconnect yourself from your actions when you are online. That may help absolve some of the guilt on the part of people who are less than honorable but it doesn't stop the repurcussions of their selfish actions.

Besides, it is a very convenient hiding place for those who don't really wish to interact. They bury themselves innit and appear half-dead to, and ignorant of, their live-neighbors all around them.

People have stunted conversations online because that is what they have been doing in their real lives too. Young people, especially. Conversations tend to be limited to exclamations. Plus the trend towards a large number of superficial friends.

For those who want to converse, an email can be as complete as a handwritten letter of the old times.

I believe that the "short-focus" world of social networking communication sites such as Facebook is a symptom, and not a cause of the general stagnation and decay of society. I work with the public in a retail environment and it is a daily occurrence to deal with customers who are so distracted by their cell-phones that they are unable to complete simple transactions. It appears to me that these people have developed a new sort of neurosis displayed by their almost constant use of their cells.
In general, their attention span is short, they are easily irritated and easily offended and seem to have NO awareness of other people in their environment. This, I believe, is symptomatic of a new sort of depression which isolates and stagnates people socially. Again, Facebook and Twitter are symptoms, not causes.

I can't imagine living without Facebook and twitter, I absolutely need to know what people are having for dinner or there every thought. I wish they would even expand it to letting me know that they are using the bathroom.

The reality is that these sites feed off of the narcissism, and then feed narcissism, because it's a way for "regular" people to feel like they are "celebrities".

@Pendkar

Young people have stunted conversations?

What do you think we do? Sit around with qith question and answer convversations about Katie Price?

My own take is that social networking sites are not creating an imitation of real life. They are creating a digital real life. The woman that died in U.K, died in real life. The fact that she offed herself after posting a suicide note on FB cannot be the reason to give FB a bad name and kill it. Just as people posted awful notes online so did she have neighbours, family and none tried to stop here either. Like in real life, the social network life is the same. Just as we dress up in the most expensive and fancy attire to gain acceptance, we photoshop our zits, wrinkles and the so on so we can project an image of ourselves. We struggle to "belong." - that is the bottomline, digitally or otherwise. The tech savvy ones band together like the barbies and so on. If you look closely at the over 1000 friends group, you will notice that most have 1000 friends of their own as well. So its high school all over again.

Personally, I think we should not blatantly blame social networking for wedging a gap, instead we should try to figure out why we treat each other the way we do. How many of your neighbours do you know? That day you got mugged on a busy street and everyone watched, was that a digital event. We should confront the issue for what it really is. The bitter truth is that we live in a shallower world than ever, where your worth is measured by what you look like, how much you got, where you went to school, etc. We are evolving but we are not growing wings or a sixth digit but we are evolving into a more wicked and self-centred species.

I think blaming social networks is a simple-minded playa hatin'.

I enjoy using social networks. I have a large extended family and most of us are on FB. We are scattered all over the world. Between that and former class mates, friends and my work as a software developer, I find social networks an indispensable tool for me in today's world.

My own take is that social networking sites are not creating an imitation of real life. They are creating a digital real life. The woman that died in U.K, died in real life. The fact that she offed herself after posting a suicide note on FB cannot be the reason to give FB a bad name and kill it. Just as people posted awful notes online so did she have neighbours, family and none tried to stop here either. Like in real life, the social network life is the same. Just as we dress up in the most expensive and fancy attire to gain acceptance, we photoshop our zits, wrinkles and the so on so we can project an image of ourselves. We struggle to "belong." - that is the bottomline, digitally or otherwise. The tech savvy ones band together like the barbies and so on. If you look closely at the over 1000 friends group, you will notice that most have 1000 friends of their own as well. So its high school all over again.

Personally, I think we should not blatantly blame social networking for wedging a gap, instead we should try to figure out why we treat each other the way we do. How many of your neighbours do you know? That day you got mugged on a busy street and everyone watched, was that a digital event. We should confront the issue for what it really is. The bitter truth is that we live in a shallower world than ever, where your worth is measured by what you look like, how much you got, where you went to school, etc. We are evolving but we are not growing wings or a sixth digit but we are evolving into a more wicked and self-centred species.

I think blaming social networks is a simple-minded playa hatin'.

I enjoy using social networks. I have a large extended family and most of us are on FB. We are scattered all over the world. Between that and former class mates, friends and my work as a software developer, I find social networks an indispensable tool for me in today's world.

If you use it to stay connected with family and friends it's a good thing.

If you spend hours at a time wasting your life playing some stupid game on one of the sites then the negative effects will greatly change your reality and social life. It can be just as anti-social as always being drunk or constantly on a hard drug.

Sad moral of this stoy is that 1048 Facebook friends do not make one REAL good friend....

About 6 months ago, I decided to break away from one of the biggest parts of popular culture today, Facebook. The world have become addicted, obsessed and dependent on this website. Everyday, millions of people sit on this website for hours creeping around and sticking their noses into other peoples business. I will admit whole heartedly that I was 100% guilty of doing this myself. Hands straight up in the air. But I think that facebook promotes gossip, backstabbing and just general noseyness. Facebook is the most visited website in the WORLD according to netcraft.com. We are living in a digital revolution where people would rather sit behind a computer screen and speak to their ‘friends’ in this form. Many people who I know that use facebook, tell me that the majority of people that they have as friends on it, are not even real friends. One of my friends recently told me that they saw someone who added them as a friend on facebook in the street who didn’t even acknowledge their presence. Is the website just a game of popularity to see how many virtual ‘friends’ people can have. It seems to me that facebook promotes popularity. Now that I no longer use the website, I can sit back and see facebook for what it really is. Of course, like everything in life, there are pro’s to having Facebook. Such as, keeping in contact with old friends who maybe live far away or sharing pictures. But all cards on the table, I think that facebook has destroyed the meaning of friendship and turned it into a whole new meaning.

Friendship should be about seeing and doing things with each other in person. People have become far too caught up in online societies like Facebook and lost touch with the meaning of real friendship. The sad thing is that, young people who grow up with Facebook will never even get to understand what it means to have true friendship. Contacting friends virtually has become more of a major pastime than literally being in ones company.

friend n.1. A person whom one knows, likes, and trusts.2. A person whom one knows; an acquaintance.3. A person with whom one is allied in a struggle or cause; a comrade.4. One who supports, sympathizes with, or patronizes a group, cause, or movement: friends of the clean air movement.5. Friend A member of the Society of Friends; a Quaker.tr.v. friend·ed, friend·ing, friends1. To add (someone) as a friend on a social networking website.2. Archaic To befriend.

I found this quite interesting, this is the definition of friend on dictionary.com. Pay close attention to the second last bullet point. - ‘To add (someone) as a friend on a social networking website.’ Are they actually for real? The whole world has become obsessed with the online societies of social networking. The first bullet point is telling us that friendship is knowing trusting and liking someone and then the second last bullet point completely contradticts this point, because, how can we do all of these things by simply adding just anysomeone on a social networking website.

I cant see popular culture turning its back on sites like Facebook. They are literally dependant on it. Its like a drug to most people now. I have heard rumors that Facebook is closing in March. If this happens, I truly believe that in the long run it could turn the world into an altogether more honest and compassionate place.

“Friends are the most important ingredient in this recipe of life.”
- (by Dior Yamasaki)

Solution: Call on facebook to change the term from friend to acquaintance so they can have a more realistic idea of what to expect from it?

Re: The woman that died in U.K, died in real life. The fact that she offed herself after posting a suicide note on FB cannot be the reason to give FB a bad name and kill it. Just as people posted awful notes online so did she have neighbours, family and none tried to stop here either. Like in real life, the social network life is the same.

We should all have only one "life"; not a seperate "real" life and "digital" one. For some people, they can utilize technology like FB, Twitter, email, as the tools they should be. However, some go overboard. I am sure this woman had friends and family however maybe she was embarrassed to reach out to them or maybe they were not able to give her the support she needed. The point is that in over 1,000 people who were this woman's "friends" not 1 had the caring concern for this person to check on her? These are not legitimate friends!

Facebook in particular has a very bad history for causing damage to relationships. A multitude of things occur on the site including embarrassing photos, cheating, breaking up marriages.

Facebook, Twitter and all these so-called 'social sites' are nothing more than ploys to gather information on private individuals. I cannot understand why the BBC fell for this, unless of course they are part of it. 1984 in 2011?

For me the Internet is the best thing since sliced bread, letting me work from home, for customers all over Europe while living in a magical and extremely sleepy corner of rural S. Italy. It has made researching topics and cross-referencing (for translation) so much easier, as expensive, clunky paper resources and physical libraries are no longer necessary. It gives me access to the world’s quality media so I don’t have to rely on abysmal Italian TV for news and entertainment. E-mail is a boon for keeping in touch, but as with more traditional forms of communication, phone, letters, I prefer to keep it one-to-one and private. I really enjoy the blogging concept because, within the limits imposed by mediators, there is space to develop an argument and have a thoughtful conversation.
However, I’m deeply allergic to both FB and Twit. I get bombarded (not boasting, honest) from the former with requests from “friends”, which I regard as nothing short of spam. The content of most twits (no typo) is utterly vacuous and, while brevity may be the soul of wit, this is just an extension of the sound-bite mentality that has reduced much of political discourse to name-calling and superficial populism.
I wouldn’t try to ban these pseudo-communications media and I acknowledge their usefulness when other forms of contact are potentially dangerous, but they should carry a health warning and young people should be educated to approach them with a healthy dose of critical thinking.

Social networks have the advantage of making the world really a small village. Thanks to them - especially Facebook - now it is possible for people to communicate with each other and to keep in touch with those afar. They constitute a free ticket to travel anywhere in the world and to "visit" instantly those who are on the other side of the world , but very near thanks to the keyboard, the screen and the headphone.

Even if the social networks didn't exist, people would have TV satellite channels to use as an escape from reality and to continue living just with stars, especially in soap operas and making of their stories a part of their reality. But with social networks people get to know real people although many of them present themselves with fake identity. Just wishing happy birthday to people on social networks is in itself a human gesture.

Finally, social networks have become a social force that galvanize people for actions and may lead them even to revolt against what they consider as wrong. It's the wrong use of social networks that make them a breeding ground for predators void of all humanity.

Advancement in technology brought people together.We made a leapfrog to mobile phone then a steady walk to email and social networking. If we climb on mountain then at one point of time we reach to cliff and any further walk is dangerous and detrimental.In advancement of communication technology, email service, was its cliff.The main question is how social networking sites lost its credibility in bringing people together.An argument in its favor that it has brought people together, is negated by many arguments against it.First one is that it reduces efficiency.Most of the users constantly think of checking wall,messages in order to update themselves and be the first to comment on that.It completely distracts their attention.Everyone knows that 99% of the updates are absurd.Secondly,for many people its like a drug ,a deadly drug like opium.Those who are addict want to leave it but are dragged in this world again.My friends who have created , deleted accounts repeatedly are victim of its vicious circle which it has created.Third problem is with those who are emotionally weak and are carried out by promises.Its very easy and widespread to create a fake account any play with someone emotions.Last,I find people who don't have social networking account called as introvert ,shy ,cold reserved by their friends and colleagues , which have bad impact on their confidence and the way they behave.Indeed it is creating a artificial world us and are compelled to be part of it.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

We don't know enough about the woman who died to do much more than feel horrible for her family and mourn her loss. I have heard about people who stand atop a building and the crowd below jeers the person to jump. social networking sites: much like a liquor store who delivers (Hey, new and business savvy concept) feeds into our addictions, if we let them. If the woman who wrote a suicide note had been my friend, i can't say that i would have even seen the note in time to respond. Facebook lets you communicate when/how/where you want. Catoring to one's convenience and annonymity desires is not always a good thing. We want to take all of the discomfort and negative consequences out of communication.

Using these networking sites as a springboard is ok, but they do tend to cator to our desires for easy communication.
if i post something on my fb wall and later decide to retract it, i can.
i can decide when to respond and whom i want to read my response.
I can think before i speak and hide my emotions when necessary. .
i can use a thesaurus to make me sound more intelligent, doctor up pictures to make me more pretty, embellish my experiences to make me sound more worldly and have an extensive friend list so that i can keep the illusion of popularity. And, if i stay in the realm of online networking, no one will ever know that i "don't speak good," live a boring 9-5 lifestyle, found most of my friends on Farmville and my imperfect appearance is staring at me in the mirror. But, as long as they don't know, they can be jealous of what they think that i have that they don't, but are faking like they do in the first place.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I don't use anit-social media, but do use email. The idea of "friending" someone you've never met, or having "frenemies," seems ludicrous to me. it's a form of false intimacy, unless the person you are talking to is someone you really, "physically"know. And I don't mean sex. This is a "physical" computer. It uses energy, as do all electronic gizmos, is made of toxic products that must be shipped overseas to be recycled, using more energy, or break down in toxic landfills, which it will eventually. Everyone must have the newest, most fashionable electronics. So more and more money is spent to support social status while less and less real intimacy and closeness is created. There is nothing like looking someone in the eyes and reading her/his face and voice simultaneously. I do agree with #28 if he meant that introversion is stigmatized. The killer is not always a "loner". Sociopaths are often charming. Introverts make better friends, but have fewer of them. "Social" media do the opposite. And often bring out the worst in people. What has happened to the value of being along and silent in nature? Last year, I was walking in a beautiful snow storm. All around me folks were phoning each other, taking videos and snap shots, in short, doing anything but looking at snow on the trees and listening to the wind. Is it possible in that state to feel, much less write, as Wallace Stevens did, in his poem "The Snow Man", about "The nothing that is there/ And the nothing that is"?

There is no question that facebook, texting, tweeting, etc has become the drug of choice for many the world over. I myself partake more than is probably completely healthy. I communicate now with people I haven’t interacted with for more than 20 years. I would hail this a triumph of technology, a shrinking of the world, a movement towards solidarity. However after reflecting on it a bit more than the unusual nanosecond I ask myself why I have such a need to now communicate with people I haven’t in more than 20 years simply because I can. Was my life so much less fulfilling before I had this ability? For me at least the answer is “not really.” I suppose for me then it is rather like the ability instantly know the weight of a polar bear; I don’t need it, I just like it. What confounded me most in my moment of reflection however is much more telling. I struggled most with the right choice of verb to accurately describe what it is I do on facebook. It isn’t, after all, that I really talk to these people. Nor do I correspond, which implies significant information, deeper reflection, and common commitment. I wouldn’t say I converse as the inconsistency of responses and time delays doesn’t really move thought forward in a concise way. Neither is it a chat, not like the chats one has over the garden fence or in the grocery line where gestures and proximity are as important as words. So, in the end I settled, as many of us do, on communicate. Which is perhaps appropriate, as it captures the distant, irrelevant and optional, yet interesting, interactions many of have in social media.

As seen in the comments above, every perspective can make a case for what is human, and how that humanity plays out and is affected by technology. I wonder if the real story of social networking isn't the sober reality of the masses - masses of more superficial people vs. less superficial people, masses of older generation vs. younger generation, masses of more economically and politically secure (allowing the luxury of wasted time) vs. the less economically and politically secure (making social connection via technology the key to improved local trade and political insurrection.) Perhaps social networking is merely a real time mirror revealing who we are as humans - many of us vulnerable to superficial addictions (as in Farmville,) many of us lonely, many of us needing connections to others (for a multitude of reasons,) many of us using these powerful tools to further our fortunes and deepen our connections to those we would otherwise miss knowing better or knowing at all.

As a teacher who witnessed the impact of technological changes on my students over 32 years, I can say with confidence that there is a generational divide between those who grew up with typewriters, hand-written letters, and phone calls that cost a fortune to those whose world has only existed with keyed-in words that erase without a trace as if they were ever thought, free letters that fly instantly around the world, and free voice connection with same-time web-cam reality.

I think it would be interesting to have each person submitting their comments to WHYS today to declare his/her age, and factor the generational component into our discussion. As for me? Today is my 62nd birthday. I think FB is STUPID, though I did reinstate my account to learn when the younger generation writes on my wall (since this is how they communicate,) to which I respond with email, not public sound-bites on FB. I can't imagine anything more narcissistic than Twitter - who cares that I'm on my way to Costco, or the bathroom, or sitting in Congress listening to the President's State of the Union speech (as a number of our Congressional leaders did - how insulting to the President.) I AM, however, indebted to Internet research (though I use a special filter to alert me to sites with poor reputations so that I can avoid hacking.) And I LOVE email, because I used to write the letters by hand then never get a stamp on them and mail them... I write more to friends now than I ever did in the "old days"... in fact, the Internet and Email have improved my quality of life and long-distance social interaction. That I don't see any value in FB and Twitter might be as much a function of age as it is disdain for superficiality... then again, my abhorrence of FB and Twitter might be corroboration that I am part of the minority of thoughtful, introspective people who have always been a minority in the human population throughout history. Egotistical? No, reality - the reality that FB and Twitter finally forces us to look in the face.

This is a clinical diagnosis that has little to do with the real world.
Where's the evidence? Do you actually see less socializing in public among the largest group of users - the young?
Have you been in your local mall on a Saturday lately?
Social networks accentuate our humanity, not lessen it. We're social animals - this is what we do.

I don't think they "make us" less human, I think we "choose to become less human" in our relationships by using them.

The human face has something like 46 muscles that communicate emotions when we are face to face with other humans (cats and dogs too can read certain facial expressions). So a lot of emotional communication is lost by using the social network sites.

So I guess we choose to become more shallow in how we relate to other humans. In a way it is like someone on FB is a "pretend human", an incomplete human.

Compare reading a Bush speech to watching him and reading his face live or on TV, he often successfully lied with words but his face betrayed him and showed that he was not to be trusted. His words and facial expressions of emotion were not congruent, they countered each other.

"Just because someone is friendly, does not mean he/she is your friend" Malcolm X

youtube search "facebook conspiracy"....for information on who is behind Facebook and the privacy rights we "Click" away when we join Facebook.

33. At 4:11pm on 25 Jan 2011, gotnotruck wrote:

he types sitting in front of one of those toxic machines called a computer. i am not sure how my laptop improves my social status, or for that matter my cell phone. these are electronic devices, which facilitate interactions, very much like a car made it easier to go and see your relatives in the next state.

Social media per se are almost limitless and with this i do not mean banal twittring but building networks capable of etsbalishing true collaborations, effective data sharing and more importantly data anlysis. yes plenty of advertisment driven companies are doing this, but think about sharing of scientific data and the potential of driving treatments based on complex genetic data anlysis and personalized medicine, we have only started to have a glimps at these possibilities.

The immense pressure to join and constantly update social networks decreases time spent interacting with people off of the internet. Consequently, meetings, university clubs, and various other gatherings become exclusive; and not unlike a popularity contest, thus reinforcing the lack of sociality that is needed in an increasingly unsocial world.

Re: Solution: Call on facebook to change the term from friend to acquaintance so they can have a more realistic idea of what to expect from it?

Noone is asking Facebook to make changes to their website. People should take responsibility for their actions and the people that they consider "friends". We could spilt hairs all day about whether someone should be defined as a "friend" or an "aquaintance". The reality is that if you consider someone a "friend" you should probably make sure they won't go behind your back and talk bad about you to a woman, tell blatant lies, or sabatage "friendships" with people who have a pretty "realistic" concept of friendship and value that friendship. Then again, maybe what we really have to consider is that person's character without involving technology. Do they have honor? Do they treat other people with compassion and understand basic manners? Or, are they just selfish? Do they even have a clue what real "friendship" is?

actually one of the funnier, as well as more tragic, aspect is people even family having feuds on facebook. do these folks not realize that all the arguments are being read by everybody, or are they actually trying to get sympathy? i have seen stuff where i was just sitting back gently shaking my head in disbelieve.

Were people who lived in rural areas in the 19th century and earlier "less human" because they had very limited human contact? They didn't even have the option of social networking, and probably went long times without seeing other people if they were not members of families. It's not like they had sporting events, grocery stores, or FREE TIME. People used to live much more difficult lives, with things being much more time consuming, like having to grow your own food, hunt, then make the food. It's not exactly simple to turn wheat into bread. There is a process involved of grinding it, preparing it, the rises, baking. It takes a lot more time to do that than to buy a loaf of bread. So when people had less chances to be around people, and chores took a lot longer, and they didn't have automobiles and were more isolated, were they "less human" ?

Everyone talks about the visual communication that seems to be nonexistent with the fb communication and i guess that is normal since they say that 90% of communication is visual. But, tone and inflection are also left out of the equasion and relegated to the imagination.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

@ 30. At 3:53pm on 25 Jan 2011, Jan Wright wrote:

"... We want to take all of the discomfort and negative consequences out of communication."

I think you have something there. Face to face human communication can sometimes be hard and necessary work in order to be a real and loving "friend".

You've got me thinking about that.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Prof. Turkel, I feel your whole approach is in the wrong direction. The problem is not the technology, the problem is PEOPLE, and more specifically the propensity of people to abuse, and get addicted to new-fangled things. People abused their use of the telephone, of the tv and so on. The solution is to explore and present more effective and expressive uses for the technology out there. Technology seems to bring out so many aspects of our humanity, and it's quite fascinating when you think about it.

I think solcial medias along with texting and email has removed intonation from language and often causes confusion. The way in which a person states something changes the meaning. Spending so much time creating new, shorter ways of saying things has interrupted language and our understanding of language. I think all this social networking is teaching us we don't need to be poliet or grammatically correct as long as we can fit something in 140 characters.

Re: Being Less Human

I think you can get to know someone very well online and maybe even be "close" to them. However, I think it can definately create some issues. You can't see their smile, hear them laugh, or even reach out and touch them. So, that closeness is really relative.

I disagree, I have had contact with loads more of my relations since joining and when it costs so much to travel you could not possibly reach all these people by travelling but you can on here.

Professor Turkel is creating good conversation with her research and book.

Often when I see someone talking to another in person (whether at a dinner table or even interacting with a cashier in a store) and then their head instantly looks to see who is texting them and returns the text, I can only wonder if the person has difficulty "being here now", and experiencing in full the moment they are living. Of course, at times, the avoidance might be deliberate, but often, I see it as avoiding to engage fully with the person in front of them. It is also a huge insult, and this somehow is dismissed.

Having said that, social networks and cellphones can offer advantages, conveniences, and enrichments. Taking the liberty of quoting Stephen Colbert when he recently invited Professor Turkel on his show, "What is there to live for without the latest iPhone?!"

@31. Jan....

Just read your comments, and oh, so true.

I have 4 very dear friends I met via social networking 8 years ago. It was not facebook. We keep in touch many times every day. We meet at least once a year in the various states in which we live. We have gone through 3 divorces, the selling of 3 houses and the buying of 3 together. We are VERY close and I consider them among my dearest friends. I have to admit, at one time during a dark period, I did probably withdraw from my real life friends too much and became probably too dependent on them, but this has balanced itself out. I think all of us did that at one time or another through some of our rough emotional times.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

It never was, is or will be the fruits of science and technology at fault for our behaviour. It is how human beings use them make them what they are! It is only when people don't know how to use them, they misuse them, and then blame it on these things for their faults and life's problems. I was never influenced by these social networks to become inhuman or subhuman nor they ever will do so in the future (I myself am a network creator and running it successfully). I found very sweet people from several parts of the world on these networks and we became friends for life. They help me a lot and I help them too. All that I ever got from internet and other uses of technologies is tremendous help and benefits. How can I blame these things then? Never!

Interesting and Totally Agree with Multipack at @1
and yes FB is just another piece of 'tech' which is up to us how we use! Its great people find old friends but 500 strangers? er, No! That just the same as drugs and booze only engaging the ego/+emotions which is a knife-edge in terms of addictive audience-attention! Like someone said on BBC FB, it's like wearing surgeons garb & mask and poking you with a cyber-pole & calling it *connecting* instead of just shaking hands?

Interesting to note, the BBC News said today that findings (from Happiness.co.uk) say that over the last 25 years, people have not been 'taught' about Feelings or how to ID other peoples feelings! Which leads to psychotic/psychopathic/or just plain stressed out behaviour, and THAT 25 years, basically coincides with how long the Internet has been around for - so it's official, the Internet and indeed all Networking sites really DO create Zombies..

Social networks do not make us less human, I am not on FB not yet It is a matter of the use of my time and some concern about privacy. What is making us less human are all of the robots in major supermarkets and stores. We are to check out our purchases and to bag them. Call me old fashioned but it just isn't the same when a machine "talks" to me. Besides I do not like the idea of people losing their jobs to automation. The other day I was in a store and the woman who rang up my purchase said to me "Have a nice day." She also smiled warmly.I also wished her a good day. When I left the store I wondered if the clerk would be there the next time I went into the store having been replaced by a machine, Frankly if that happens I will try another store where humans still wait on customers,

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

When I get interupted when talking, I mean actually talking, because they "have" to respond to a tweet or a facebook commment, then I realise social networks aren't actually 'social'. The biggest con is calling these digital connections "communities". I certainly use social networks but they do not extend or replace my understanding of community, or having people over to share food and conversation.

Does social network make us "less human"?, no it makes us better informed only that we engage less often on other activities. Theres always a price one pays, for better or worse.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.