This has happened before and will happen again…
My apologies for the title, I have Battlestar Galactica on the brain these days. But the phrase really summed up something I wanted to write about.
The Out of Ur blog recently posted a video of N.T. Wright going off on the dangers of social media. He warms that blogging and the like will stand in the way of real communication with others and he calls the popularity of social media “cultural masturbation.” Now it’s nothing new to hear some voice or other going off on modern technology, putting their own particular “it’s the end of the world as we know it” spin on the matter. And on many issues I truly love and respect N.T. Wright, so I was disappointed to hear someone so knowledgeable about history and faith jump on the “caution people about the perceived dangers of the internet” bandwagon. And admitting the irony that his video was posted on a blog to be discussed on blogs, Facebook, and Twitter, let me just rant for a moment why I am tired of this discussion.
Let’s just get it out of the way. The warning that Wright and others give is that social media takes people away from actual face-to-face interaction. That if we spend too much time blogging and tweeting we will reduce our time spent with huggable (Wright’s term) people. The problem is – that just isn’t true. A recent Pew Study busted that myth. It reported that, yes, about 6% of the population are isolated and asocial, but that is a number that has stayed steady since 1985 – before the widespread advent of the internet. The study also found that people who spend time on the internet are actually far more likely to go out and be with real live people than those that don’t use the internet. The point – social media actually builds community, even of the huggable people sort. Not only that, but that community is actually more diverse than those that don’t use social media.
Now I admit, there is the temptation online to not present one’s true self to the world. I think using the internet for role-playing and gaming is one thing (come on, you can freaking FLY in Second Life!), but aside from people who are already social deviants I see most people being themselves online. For example, I recently decided to alter my blogroll to a list of people’s names. Aside from group blogs and the occasional anonymous blog, most people are known these days by their true identity and not just their blog name. That wasn’t the case when I first started blogging or interacting online. Back then, most people hid behind cute avatars and handles. Most of the blogs I read, especially those by women, were anonymous, but over the years people have moved towards being themselves by using their real name. Same thing with email addresses. It used to be that everyone had some personal descriptor/ alter-ego as their email – like JesusGirl98 or SurfrBoy123. And yes, my first email address was EponineJMG@aol.com (ah, the musical obsessed highschool girl demographic). I still cringe a bit when I sign into a site I’ve been on for a long time (like The Ooze) and have my user name be some variation of MaraJade. Back then, I assumed that the internet wasn’t real community and that I could hide behind my username, but I’ve come to realize that I have to be true to myself. And that involves using my real name and only writing the things I am not afraid to own up to.
So as I present my true self to the world and see others doing the same, I get more and more annoyed with those that accuse online communication of not being real communication. I’m sorry, but how the hell is it not real? Communication of this sort has existed for ages, blogs and Facebook and Twitter are just its newest forms. Back in college we had message board and blog posts – only they were of the paper and pen variety. Someone would write out a few paragraphs or pose a question and tape that paper to a wall in the student center or even in a bathroom stall. We would add our replies with pens. Same thing in grade school. We would fill notebooks with Facebook-esqe questions like “What are your favorite bands?” or” Where do you want to live when you grow up?” and pass them around class getting everyone’s responses. And go back a few hundred years. You have Martin Luther posting his 95 Theses to the Wittenberg Door. You have pamphlets being printed to disseminate ideas, and counter-pamphlets appearing in return. Sure, it took longer, but its the same idea as blog posts. Or the way letters to the editor used to functions as a forum for discussion. Or even the popularity of pen-pals one would never meet. Communication of this sort has all happened before, so why is it that this time it isn’t real?
Social media doesn’t destroy or hinder community, it builds it. As a fairly extreme introvert, I had far fewer friends before I started connecting through the internet. Now because of online connections and discussions, I am spending much more time with flesh and blood huggable people. Like any community or form of communication, the online world has its flaws – no one is disputing that. But I am tired of being told to fear something for dubious reasons. So Wright can call this age-old form of communication cultural masturbation if he wants, I’ll just send him a virtual pint on Facebook and have fun discussing his ideas with my friends – both on and off line. Because that’s real community.
julieclawson(at)gmail(dot)com 
well said.
I think his concern is valid and well articulated. In the end, it’s possible to embrace social media while being honest about the shadow it casts (unless for you there is no shadow). I also think you’re hyperbolizing his comments as “going off.” He doesn’t come off that way to me. I think it’s a relatively reasonable push back.
I like what you said about ‘paper and pen’ communications. I think Mr. Wright has just constructed an argument against the literary world. Based on his argument even books could be considered ‘dehumanizing’ and even more so because there is no interaction between the author and the reader.
In casting a stone at online communication I think he is hitting his own glass house as a literary communicator.
(By the way: I greatly admire and respect N.T. Wright as well)
Also by the way: I do think there are great dangers to social media and online communication but if anyone’s critique is not as a participant I think it comes off as somewhat judgmental or at least misguided. And that’s how I feel about Mr. Wright’s comments. He’s misunderstanding the validity of postmodern, digital communication.
We all are prone to throw stones at what we don’t understand. I throw stones at the increasing use of mobile communications and…you guessed it…I’m not a participant.
All in all, this is a great debate for the church at large to be having.
Great thoughts Julie!
I was wondering the same thing J. Does Tom even know that of which he speaks? Has he ever had a blog? Is he on Facebook or Twitter? Does he regularly participate in online debates/discussions? If not, then how does he really even know what he’s talking about? As the old saying goes, “Don’t knock it till you try it.”
I wanted to note that the excerpt on Out of Ur is one video out of a series made from a question and answer discussion setting from some time ago. I remember watching the entire discussion at the time, though I can’t dig out a link to it now. (Ah, the intro says it’s an outtake from a documentary, so the videos I saw probably are no longer online. Far be it from me to cynical about the motivation in promoting this outtake.) It covered a range of topics. I’m not sure of the motivation behind taking an old video out of its context and posting it to Ur video. That seems designed to provoke a reaction.
I’ll also note that Bishop Wright does not say that social media is cultural masturbation. Rather, he says that he’s concerned that if it is disconnected from real life human interaction does not translate into real action, it could devolve into a self-stimulation that would be akin to cultural masturbation. (My paraphrase.) I’ve been involved in online methods of communication since the 80s and that has always been a risk for any given person even when it does not apply to the majority.
He goes on to point out that he does make extensive use of email and texting and appreciates the greater personal reach they give him.
From ntwrightpage.com you can find the link to the youtube videos of Bishop Tom’s lecture during the Digital Symposium at St. John’s last July. That’s at least a more comprehensive look than the brief outtake above. He does pose the question in the third video about whether this is a new tower of babel or a new expression of pentecost. In truth, it’s probably some of both.
I don’t really have any thoughts or strong reaction either way to your own post, Julie. I probably largely agree with it. But did want to point out the above.
Julie,
This drives me crazy as well. I was at a conference this summer where a well-known Christian author/speaker was going off on the ills of social media – I was so disappointed, I had to leave. I wonder if a part of the issue for these folks is about control. With social media conversations, no one is really in control of the conversation. Oh sure, you can moderate or unfriend, but I don’t think that is not the norm. One of the things I love about social media is that I can finally get in on conversations that I have felt were restricted to me before. Also blogging for me has been a huge help in my faith journey. I have always had to write to clarify my thoughts. By writing my random thoughts to the “world” and gaining some clarity, more than ever I find I want to put my words into action out there in “real life” with others.
I agree with Kim. For most of my adult life I lived in a small town far away from anything considered remotely “cultural.” With the advent of the internet and social media, and thanks to blogs, Twitter, and Facebook, I’ve made (and met some personally) friends in England, New Zealand, Canada, and other parts of the U.S. Without it, I perhaps might never have ventured out of my little town. Social media has widened my circle of friends not narrowed it or isolated me. I’ve taken college courses online and I’ve interacted in classrooms. Again, no isolation there.
As with all fears (TV promotes violence, video games make children violent, et al), those who are isolated, fearful, sociopathic, violent, pedophilic, or otherwise phobic will always be so, no matter which form of communication they find. An isolated person isolates him/herself. I’d be blaming the person first and not the means for interaction.
Scott,
I shot the video a couple of years ago and asked this particular question of Bishop Wright who was in Toronto for an event at Wycliffe College. (He’s sitting in the Dean’s office.) My wife, Imbi Medri-Kinnon was interviewing the good bishop about what he thought church leadership would look like in the 21st century. (Her documentary, which I am editing has been delayed by my schedule.)
I found his response to my question particularly appropriate for me. As an introvert, it has often been easier for me to communicate via social media rather than in person. I know this to be the case for a number of bloggers with whom I’ve come to know. (Regardless of the Pew stats.) I felt I’d received a loving pastoral rebuke and confess surprise at the level of animus in Julie’s response.
I haven’t stopped blogging, tweeting or connecting via FB as a result of NTW’s statement – nor do I believe that is what he’s suggesting we do here.
Unless you’ve been in my edit suite, Scott, you have not seen the entire interview. Imbi allowed me to use two other brief clips from this interview in a project I did with Allelon two years ago. Thanks for questioning my integrity in putting it up. As I’m relatively easy to be in contact with, feel free to do that in person, if you’d like.
I should note that Out of Ur did not ask me whether I’d mind them including this clip on their surrounded by advertising blog. This would be my own fault for not restricting the embeddable nature of the clip.
After watching the video, I’m not convinced that Wright completely threw social media/blogging under the bus. In fact, I’d say that reactions against the video highlight some of the additional problems associated with blogging that Wright has had to contend with in the past. Quotes tend to get lifted out of context. Views tend to get summarized imperfectly. Positions don’t always have time to get fleshed-out properly…(which would probably drive Wright crazy were he to attempt blogging!)And we tend to fixate on controversial soundbites, which isn’t always helpful for serious discourse.
That being said, I completely agree with all of your points, Julie. The Pew research is fascinating, and it flies in the face of the notion that social media kills “real life” relationships.
I too am a blogger and an introvert by nature. I also live in a very small town in East Tennessee. Facebook, Twitter, and blogging have helped me connect with all kinds of people I might not otherwise connect with. Many of these online connections later evolve into face-to-face relationships.
This whole thing is probably more of a generational difference than anything else. I hate to put someone as brilliant as NT Wright into this category…but folks are normally suspicious of things they don’t really understand.
Ah, it must have been the other clips in connection with Allelon that I remembered watching along with this one. I couldn’t remember the context. I did remember that the clip was pretty old, not something recent.
I’m sorry I jumbled several thoughts together and was unclear. I was questioning the motivation behind posting it to Ur with the particular tagline they used, not the motivation behind releasing a clip. I didn’t realize someone had posted it there without your knowledge or consent, though, and I apologize for my assumptions in that regard.
I also thought it was a balanced and loving response. As Bishop Wright also mentioned, he would have a similar concern about TV. And again, sorry for leaping to some wrong conclusions.
Scott,
Thanks for the response. Pas de problem, as my Quebec-born cousins might say.
Regarding the Pew Study, it does say this on page 9 of the pdf,
So it’s not quite the slam dunk negative response to Wright’s concerns that Julie suggests.
To clarify – nowhere did I say that I thought Wright was the main voice for this argument or that he is totally anti-internet. This video is just the latest in a long line of critiques that question the validity of online community. His interview was the prompt. I admitted that there are issues with online communication, one would be a fool to think otherwise. And my response was not one of anger as suggested, but an expression of disagreement.
And I admit, one study isn’t the final argument for anything. I included it to show that the fear of isolation is often unfounded. But Bill, I really don’t get the power of the “don’t rely on neighbor” thing as proof of isolation. I fit that demographic, I help my neighbors but don’t rely on the eldery, the dying of cancer, or the drug addicts that live around me for much of anything. But because I don’t spend my afternoons chatting over my white picket fence as I exchange cups of flour with my neighbor doesn’t mean I don’t have community.
I think I’m just sick of this conversation happening in the extremes. Either we are told to fear the internet or we are seen as consumed by it. Can’t we like anything celebrate it in moderation and enjoy its benefits without always having to hear the voice of doom and gloom (and accusation)?
Isn’t that what the good Bishop is also suggesting – moderation? Perhaps my Canadian ears hear his tone and phraseology differently than you do, Julie or I could simply be wrong. This wouldn’t be the first time.
Julie – I agree with you 100%.
And I agree that it is likely a generational reaction. Twenty years from now, it will thought of just as email and texting are thought of – an extended form of communication.
All communication has the potential for misuse or misunderstanding.
As for the Pew stats on internet users and neighbors – I’d refrain from making causative statements here. There could be any number of reasons why for that stat: Maybe internet users live in areas with less available/reliable neighbors. Maybe their support connections are outside their immediate community. Lack of contact with neighbors doesn’t mean they lack human contact. It just means they don’t connect with their neighbors.
Case in point – ALL of my neighbors and I connect via facebook, as well as many members of my extended family. It’s a great way to keep tabs on people. I’ve heard of births, deaths, accidents, etc. via social networking on real life friends, neighbors and family.
I am also fed up of this discussion, which seems to take place in the context that the Internet requires some kind of approval from Bishops before Christians should congregate there.
I was at the conference in Durham that’s mentioned above – though I had to leave before the Bishop spoke, I was able to see it on you tube and become thoroughly irritated by his simplistic approach – again, the word ‘gnostic’ was bandied around, apparently on the basis that anything that doesn’t take place face to face is denying the physical nature of our being. Which makes both people who use the phone a lot and St Paul gnostic I guess.
Personally, I think the key factor in social networking is the interactivity, which happens at the time the communication happens, so anyone who doesn’t interact is not really going to get it. But because it leaves behind words on a page, it can be read afterwards and judged as if it’s something static that’s been produced for consumption by third parties.
I agree that we need to move on from discussing the medium and start working out how to use it to transit the message to a wide range of people for whom there is no big issue in going online.
“But because I don’t spend my afternoons chatting over my white picket fence as I exchange cups of flour with my neighbor doesn’t mean I don’t have community.”
Great line, Julie. This made me smile.
I think this is an important debate to continue having because people (like me – and maybe N.T.) who have seen social media cause problems for people are more cautious about it. I use it, but I have seen it cause problems in my own marriage and in others. Is it a problem for everyone? No. Is it a problem for some? Yes. I think it’s ok to continue working towards a healthy approach to it.
There are studies saying that porn doesn’t cause relationship problems, but I think you’ll find a lot of people who disagree with that because they’ve had a negative experience. People will warn that porn leads to all sorts of ills, but as porn consumption has boomed, the rates of suicide, divorce, and rape have declined. So while there might not be ‘proof’ that porn causes harm, and while it’s been around in some form forever, I think it is still important to keep the dialogue going.
As one of my mentors used to say, “The truth is in the tension.”