Space: The Final Frontier?

“We no longer have to physically transport to share information,” ~Helen Couclelis, Flows and Flowmations

In Flows and Flowmations the author speaks about the time-space continuum in regards to communication. In the past, the farther apart a sender and receiver were, the longer it took for information to be shared. With the invention of the internet, space has become an insignificant variable in the communication process. It has created a world where we can share information almost instantly (depending on your signal strength) across the globe; you can upload pictures, videos, and chat with friends in another country in real-time. However, what effect is this “instant access” having on our communication process? Is it a good or a bad effect?  And do previous theories still hold true? 

One result of this access to information is the complications of adding more receivers to a message. Social networking sites allow access to information from one sender, to hundreds if not thousands or millions of receivers (depending on your privacy settings). As Korac-Kakabadse, et al. discusses in Low and High-Context Communication Patterns: Towards Mapping Cross-Cultural Encounters, one must adjust their behavior to the sender's orientation when they are communicating, but how can you do so when you can’t even be sure who your receiver is? We no longer have control over the messages we put out into “cyberspace”, they can be cut, copied, pasted and reconfigured into something entirely out of character. They can be distorted and used for purposes the sender never meant. Losing control of one's own message can be a frequent occurrence. 

Also, an important part of the communication process is feedback to the sender, so the sender can respond or adapt his/her message (Weaver Shannon model, Flows and Flowmations) In the present time, we now send messages out into the open, with no expectation of response or feedback, we have no idea what affect our messages are having on receivers, and can be surprised by any hostility or negative reaction to what we intended our messages to mean. Without context, or non-verbal cues from our receivers, we remain ignorant of feedback. And as the old adage goes, "No news is good news." We think that without any feedback, the message has been received and decoded properly and move on to the next message. A sender should be constantly aware and search out feedback

Last, instantaneous communication internationally causes the need for shorter reaction times by governments and diplomats, effecting world relations more quickly than ever. When a message is sent out into the world, it can spread across the globe instantly. Causing civic pressure internally on governments and externally from foreign populations who want their governments to react. This can be a good thing, when immediate actions are needed to respond to a violent regime, but it can also be a bad thing when time for more diplomatic measures is needed.

As we embark on this age of instant access to information, we must tread carefully. We have to be critical receivers of messages, and active senders. The process of communication is becoming more complicated and the dangers of miscommunication or misunderstandings are exponentially worse as the world becomes more interconnected. As worlds are colliding together on the internet though, perhaps people can learn more about the process of communication, and come away more aware of the differences between communication styles and more effective in understanding and using them.