Social Media and Communication

Only about 7% of communication is through actual words, the other 93% is due to nonverbal modes of communication (physical appearance, proxemics, kinesics, paralanguage, and haptics). Nonverbal means of communication are anything that doesn’t include the actual words said. Physical appearance deals with how a person outwardly looks. Proxemics is the space around the participants during communication. Kinesics is body language; gestures and postures the participants take while communicating. Paralanguage is the pitch and tone as well as pacing of the words, but don’t include the words themselves. And haptics is the use of touch in communication.

So, you can see the issue that arises when more and more communication is dependent on social media and online modes and less face-to-face than ever before. Granted, there are definitely benefits to CMC, but there are notable disadvantages as well. In this article, by Susan Tardanico, she addresses the advent of communication barriers and the disconnection between people due to CMC. The main disadvantage she targets is the lack of nonverbal clues in CMC and specifically social media. Meaning is lost through the lack of nonverbal clues and can often be confusing: people can appear to be genuine while not meaning what they say and the vice versa can be true as well; people can truly mean what they say but the way its constructed can make it appear like they don’t. As put by Tardanico, communication through CMC “may or may not be accurate representations of the truth.”

She also addresses the anonymity of hiding behind a computer screen while communicating. Being behind a screen not only takes away from nonverbal communication (as mentioned before) but also allows the presence of self-presentation of identity. This is when the users of CMC change how they present themselves online. They usually make themselves look better and more flattering than they actually are. In other cases, they may choose not to present themselves at all; people can make fake identities and false personas to perpetuate their own needs and goals. By being anonymous online, people can do things they wouldn’t be able to communicating face-to-face. They have the free will to alter what others can see about them and what information they voluntarily give out.

Although there are negatives, Tardanico also gives some suggestions on how to improve and correct this. The main action she proposes is to just try to communicate through face-to-face interaction more often. CMC is not bad; it is just not as useful if it isn’t coupled with more face-to-face interaction. When used together properly, they can counteract their negatives and allow for more meaningful and accurate communication. Also, awareness plays a large part in being successful at CMC. One has to know the benefits and downsides to CMC and to be able to act accordingly. For example, being able to recognize that sarcasm, emphasis, or subtle clues being sent over texts or emails is difficult to pick up on is good because then you can change how you word your phrases and/or reconsider sending the message at all in order to avoid miscommunication.

All in all, CMC through either social media or any other online medium can be beneficial to communication, but its full potential will be brought out with face-to-face communication and the awareness that it has its limitations.