‘I wish I could fly.’ ‘But you will…’

The inherent dangers of Internet Communication Technologies, well, psychologically speaking.
Text: Gary McLeod

Flying was the dream of man. For some reason, the bird was a mystery to the human species in that it could do something we could not. A few centuries of attempts and we have reached a stage where our way of flying depends on a stream of air that scarily keeps us above ground in a way we shouldn’t be. It has allowed us to travel and travel we do, at ridiculous prices at times, but this could change. The danger to air travel and most other forms of travel is of course Internet technologies. Connecting at a distance without physically being there is a wonderful thing: no more landscapes to look out the window at; no more having to find a book to read; no more accidental encounters with strangers. We are living the age of instant contact where these kind of technologies affect businesses, education and personal relationships because they enable us to get everything we want as soon as we want it; It allows us to be nowhere and somewhere at the same time and it’s a good thing, right?

Lets take the businessman who wakes up one morning feeling very sick. He has a very important meeting that morning and feels completely unable to attend. The video conferencing in the office and his fast broadband connection at home enable our businessman to be on time for the meeting, hear everything that is being said, contribute to the bullet points and discussions of the meeting; all without coughing and spluttering over the other businessmen inattendence. Perfect for him and perfect for his colleagues and yet can he have lunch with them? No. Of course, he is sick and this of course would stop him anyway from attending but what if this became a daily thing, and not only for him, but for his colleagues as well? The company would save money on transportation costs as well as many other expenses. All of the employees could work in this manner and in fact some employees in some companies already do. When you have to go from A to C, who needs B?

Lets take an English school, which on one day decides to use the Internet and video conferencing technology to allow it’s students to study from home. This is very convenient for the school because it gives them a new target base of students and its great for the students because they can study when it suits them, no matter how hot the weather is or how wet it is. Rain or shine, they can feel assured in the knowledge that they can study at home no matter what, and they are then encouraged to feel that they will get better at their English ability because they would be more relaxed. There is a key moment in a child’s life when before they can walk properly, they try to run towards their parents and they fall over. Learning how to walk is fundamental to learning how to run. Switching from watching the TV one minute to studying English online the next, only to get on with cooking the dinner afterwards is easy for everybody but where is the preparation? I don’t mean getting the vegetables ready, but where’s the time to focus the mind on the studying at hand. It doesn’t exist unless the student sets that time aside. And then there are the teachers. With students at something of a safe distance there could be a tendency to indulge in mannerisms, which might otherwise be considered unprofessional- what the student doesn’t see, doesn’t hurt them. Of course, then there is also the potential for voyeurism completely unbeknown to the student. Such a system could allow a teacher to see the student long before the student sees the teacher. If there were unhealthy people in the company’s midst, this all makes for a potentially very scary environment, and not just for the student, but also for the teacher. Caution then is obviously needed in these situations but as we know from childhood, falling is part of learning.

Messenger programs are another segment of the current technologies and as everyone knows allows people to keep in touch with old friends, long distance friends and of course family. The former nuclear family is now essentially an atomized one where geographical distance only rules out the reassuring hug or pat on the back. Who needs them though when you have emoticons, which can make people smile, give praise where it might be needed. A simple clap of the hands by a smiley face and your problems will go away, right? Perhaps Internet communication technologies like Skype are the right balance of space and contact? Perhaps they are the answer to being in 2 places at once especially when you need help? Or perhaps they contribute to the problem? The software tells you if that person is available or not, so here’s a question: why do people sign in to the software only to set themselves as ‘away’ or ‘busy’? If you were truly busy, wouldn’t you have no time to be logged in? This is the consistent dilemma with these technologies. They increasingly encourage us to expect an answer from the person and we all know what happened when the little boy cried wolf and expected an answer. No answer came and technologies such as Skype , Yahoo messenger, iChat and MSN messenger all could potentially create an epidemic of depressed, or worse still, bi-polar people who find themselves thriving on the presence or non-presence of other people online. People would lose sight of where they are from and where they are going. Dislocation in virtual environments is nothing new as extreme cases have been well documented with chat rooms being blamed for virtual bullying as well as other cases of extreme and often false behavior. Chat rooms are a risky environment as everyone knows but there is still the sense of caution when one walks into a chat room, the same as there would be in any bar with a bunch of strangers. The silent problem lies in the programs that we all, especially when so far away from our families and old friends, use to stay in touch, a concept that would 200 years ago, would have entailed a letter traveling for maybe 6 months. These ‘comfortable’ programs really do ensure that the only difference between being with or without someone is the time zone as geographical space becomes merely symbolic and potentially traumatic when you naturally want to see a person physically. It is then that the reality of distance kicks in.

So, what to do in all of this? Turning it all off and removing programs from computers would be a drastic measure because, as have we have seen, the technology is beneficial in some cases. Complaining, as some may think I am doing, is perhaps the ludite’s response and using the technology less is maybe the therapist’s response. The most problematic aspect from these technologies, as is the case with most digital technology, is the need for immediate impact. We want everything quickly. Somehow, we have all lost that ability to take time to learn to walk. Immediate technology is difficult to throw away and we all appreciate its conveniences, but learning, in all its forms takes time. Perhaps learning to walk before we can run is not necessarily the answer. Perhaps we should be concerning ourselves again with learning to fly? Farcical perhaps but if we can no longer remained fixed to the ground, and communication technologies which allow us to roam and stay in touch suggest we can’t, then at some point we are going to theoretically float off the surface. And if that happens, there is more of a chance of falling so we must learn how to float in the right direction.