Earlier this month, there was a minor dust up in Fairview, KS when high school senior Emma Sullivan tweeted about Governor Sam Brownback after listening to him make a speech to a student group. In this tweet, she claimed she had complained to him about his message and ended it with what some considered a vulgarity. Brownback staffers alerted the school’s principal who called her into the office and asked that she apologize. She refused. The next several days witnessed vitriol on both sides of the issue, some defending her First Amendment rights and others saying she should be paddled.
Although it later turned out that she had lied about meeting him and saying the comments in question, this does beg the question,
“What was she thinking?” Our society’s digital natives are coming of age immersed in transactional communication. Without developing the requisite skills in reading non-verbals associated with communications prior to the last decade, these young people are now more likely to state their opinions and feelings impulsively without thought to possible reactions or consequences. The main reason for this is the delay in response from those to whom they send it.
If I speak to someone in person or over the phone, I get an immediate reaction. They may say something in return. I may sense an emotion simply because of the timing of response. With experience, I can detect, agreement, impatience, anger, agreement, worry, frustration and a host of other feelings. With e-mail, texting and social networking, the response may not come for seconds, minutes, hours, even days. Is it any wonder then that those who rely on digital communication rather than voice think less of the consequences of what they are typing? For young people, who have not yet developed the nuanced understanding of adult communication, this can be even more pronounced.
Will we see more of this? Undoubtedly. The question will be how to address it, especially with those who draw comfort from confining their communication to thumbs and screens?