I am a neanderthal to whom the acme of technological achievement is using e-mail. I am one of those guys who thinks that Twitter is what twits do and Face book is a photo album. It has also been dinned into me by my children that the new age social media is for young folks and that it is no place for old men! I am lost in meetings when young folk talk about advancements in communication that seems light years ahead of my comprehension.
One day when I was wandering around in this mental fog, I got one of my infrequent flashes of clarity and I am rushing to share it with you, dear reader.
It is one of the ironies of life that the e-revolution, which supposedly promotes a paperless world, has ended up increasing the consumption of paper.
In a similar twist, I would argue that the digital social revolution that is meant to increase social interaction clearly has the potential to derail personalised interaction. This is delicious irony considering the fact that human beings are defined as social animals who are supposed to like the company of others like themselves.
We are now at a stage when people seem to prefer dealing more with an army of e-people than a handful of real people.
Clearly, there is a very large and crucial role that new age mass communication applications such as Facebook and Twitter play in serving corporate needs. They help communicate information effectively to the relevant audiences and in real time. In a way, this is effective, focused messaging to a very large audience. Much like a narrow spectrum antibiotic that addresses only a specific curative need; the difference being the fact that is also administered to a very large patient population all at one time.
What is interesting is that many a time, personalities who embody a company, also help spread important messages about their organisation using such media. The problems of this approach become apparent when the distance between the personal and professional worlds start to shrink and there is the inevitable cross-over when the boundaries between the two worlds get fuzzy. This can be dangerous when messages have the potential to lead to a situation when personal attributes get tagged onto the organisation and equally seriously, when organisational attributes get attached to individuals. This will clearly lead to distortions in what is sought to be conveyed.
A more insidious outcome is the issue of the concept of personalised space being lost. One of the major outcomes of the Reformation movement was Martin Luther's enunciation of the doctrine of two kingdoms, that is, in essence, the separation of the church and the nation. The English philosopher John Locke's writings helped crystallise this further and they eventually influenced important parts of the US constitution. In turn, this constitution has been a source of inspiration to many newly liberated countries in the twentieth century. Similarly, we need a similar declaration of intent in making sure that the line separating the personal space from the professional space is maintained.
Another worrying aspect is the loss of privacy. The irony is that celebrities who are legitimately upset when a few paparazzi invade their privacy, seem willing to invite multitudes of the paparazzi into their lives voluntarily. This can apply equally to corporate honchos and sub-honchos as well. At some point, they feel the stress of such sharing when the attention becomes intense and intrusive.
Exhibitionism is bound to attract voyeurism. The principle of transparency clearly needs to be balanced by the need to know principle; the advent and viral spread of the new social media makes this a very difficult balance to attain.
In some ways, this sits oddly when the same folks choose to behave in non-transparent ways in other matters. The net result is confusion in the minds of most people in the system.
In addition, unscrupulous professionals who broadcast misleading or distorted views through the social media, which is an open forum, can lead to people believing them to be the gospel truth.
Goebbels, who believed in the maxim that any lie uttered often enough will be perceived to be the truth, would have dearly loved the reach and power of today's social media.
One of the cardinal traits of older folks is to worry about the tendencies of younger folks and I am no exception. What worries me in all this is the manner in which faceless, multilateral communication is fast replacing one-on-one communication in the corporate world. It is clear that personalised mass communication powered by digital technology is here to stay and in many ways, it is a great thing to have happened.
It is not my case that one has to make a choice between one or the other; I only feel that there is space for both types of communication and one has to use each one judiciously. I am reminded of advertisements that used to portray skinny guys developing muscles on one side only because they used badly designed Product X vis-a-vis a beaming Superman-like hulk who used Product Y that exercised both sides of his body!
Time to give some importance to face time even as we savour the delights of Facebook time!
(The writer is corporate advisor to the Manipal Education and Medical Group. He can be reached at >mcshekaran@gmail.com )