TMB*

One impact of modern communication technology is that we now prefer to text instead of talking on the phone. Sometimes texting can be a fast and efficient way to figure out logistics. Adept texters set up their messages in way that minimizes message overload. A typical text from such a person will state the time of the event and invite you along; the event will happen with or without you, and you don’t even need to reply. If you choose to then you can accept or decline the generic invitation with a short phrase. While mass texting is efficient, it should be used sparingly, and only to communicate info regarding an important event. Etiquette would demand that people do not mass text about some minor detail of their lives, such as what they happen to be doing at the moment, personal preference, or their opinion. Facebook and Twitter remain the appropriate venue for such communication. Also it can be risky and a hassle to mass text and invite people to an event with limited attendance. For example, “I have two tickets to the ( - ) show, anyone want to go?” Depending on the text list, this can quickly turn into a nightmare for the texter, when more people want to go then there are tickets, seats, spaces available, or when people agree then change their minds. In this case, it’s best to create a Facebook event or send an old fashioned Evite. Mass texting is undoubtedly about efficiency and inclusion, but it is important to manage the text list properly so that you don’t invite people out who have since moved, are on vacation, or are recently deceased.

While mass texting is sometimes necessary, the majority of the messages we send are to individuals. We all have different attitudes toward texting in regard to what is acceptable or even necessary. Some like to send messages about trivial things, while others prefer that messages serve some logistical or practical purpose. From this we get texts as varied as, “just saw a pink cat at the mall,” to “pick up some milk on your way home from work.” Much of people’s attitude toward texting is determined by their texting plan. If you pay a twenty cents a text, you are likely not going to appreciate hearing about the pink cat; if you have an unlimited plan, you might find yourself commenting on all manner of things you see and experience in your daily routine: pink cats, a rash on your leg, the tasty burrito you just ate, how boring your client meeting is, etc. In this way texting serves to prove we exist and have thoughts and feelings. Whether anyone cares or not, this form of communication is once again more appropriate for a status update or a tweet.

Texting, along with tweeting and status updates, is changing the way we write. With texting we are developing a new shorthand for communication. Above all, we want texting to be fast, so instead of spelling out words, we reproduce them phonetically by single vowels, letters, or numbers. In this way, we take contraction to a new level and “I’ll see you later,” becomes “c u l8r.” In addition to abbreviating our words, we have created new acronyms such as MEGO, my eyes glaze over, for you business types at a meeting; MOS, mother over shoulder, for the precocious teen; or ADIH, another day in hell, for the dyed-in-the-wool optimist. One wonders if in the future we will be able to communicate in a lexicon comprised entirely of acronyms, the roots of which we will all have since committed to memory. Certainly, it wouldn’t be difficult to just use the first letter of every word, and, like airport codes, when there was some redundancy we could include only the crucial letters. What would it sound like if, for nations using the Roman alphabet, we made it a spoken language as well? Like pig latin, the question is whether or not it would catch on. AAR IDTS BITMT WWJD**?

One problem with texting is that with its short format and abbreviated form it is very difficult to sense the tone of a person’s communication. While emoticons may be helpful in indicating when someone is happy, sad, or trying to be funny, they fall far short of expressing more subtle emotions. Even if the list of emotions was expanded and the expressions refined, emoticons would still be useless in expressing irony or sarcasm. In the absence of being able to see a person’s face, hear their voice, and observe their body language, novels seem the most capable of providing us with an in-depth look into the emotional landscapes of human beings. We have all likely experienced a misunderstanding while texting where what we intended to communicate was not what was perceived. In this way the happy emoticon we intended to be funny was thought to be mocking, or the sad emoticon we employed to sympathize was misconstrued as pity. Not all of us are poets who can express great emotion and beauty with an economy of words, and even poets would have trouble employing the new vernacular to mine the depths of their souls and seduce the maidens of their hearts.

Another problem with texting is that, like all recorded writing, once the message is sent over the airwaves it is permanent. There is no taking back that drunk text to your ex-sombody late at night, that petty comment made to a friend or coworker, that bitter complaint about your job or your boss, that obscene come-on to a new love interest, and any and all off-the-cuff comments that can be misunderstood and taken out of context; no, it has become a part of the ether, recorded on someone else’s phone, and possibly forwarded to where it can make you look like a fool, do considerable damage to your reputation, and potentially destroy your livelihood. So perhaps an economy of language isn’t so bad after all. Instead of texting to replace verbal communication, which we forgive for its spontaneity and is lost to the wind, we should use it for practical purposes, never saying any more than necessary, as if we were being interrogated in a courtroom.

On the other hand, perhaps an inverse relationship exists between the quantity and the quality of our written communication. A consequence of constant texting, tweeting and updating our profiles may be that we are less concerned with the conventions of grammar, engage in less in-depth thought, and have lost our sense of audience, concerned as we are with sharing our own day to day activities and opinions with the world. The benefit of this is that if we share something personal and perhaps compromising people are less likely to care. In the sea of written information that we are all swimming in, we can no longer see the meaning for the words.

In this period of overlapping technologies and unlimited access to information, it can be confusing to understand the proper forum, format, and etiquette for our communication. Already on our phones we can talk, text, email, watch videos, play video games, listen to music, and surf the net; the same goes for our computers. The north south divide notwithstanding, what this has meant is the horizontal integration of human society in which everyone can be a creative subject. While this has made it easier to express one’s ideas and pursue one’s own self interest, it has also made it harder to be recognized in sea of competition, and harder still to determine what is quality content. Simply put, we are overwhelmed with information and need to be selective and sincere in what we share and consume.


* TMB (Text me back)
** AAR IDTS BITMT WWJD? (At any rate I don’t think so, but in the meantime what would Jesus do?)

Click here for a list of text message abbreviations.