Relatioship with smart phones; mass communication

Human interaction has undergone drastic changes over the last few decades; prominent among these is the invention and development of telecommunication technology, particularly mobile telephony. Leading in terms of mobile supremacy are the iPhones, which are advanced mobile phones that satisfy virtually all communication needs. This is because the technologies used are unique and easily customized for individuals and enterprises. I prefer the smart phone because I can send texts to, call, and even hold face-to-face conversations with my friends through Skype. Furthermore, it can do most of the things a computer can do such as browsing the internet; one can access social networking sites like Facebook and Tweeter, download music and even watch TV (Kroski 2008, p. 18). They are also used to determine to what social class a person belongs – the better and the more recent one’s iPhone is, the higher this person’s social class is, in people’s judgment. Despite their advantages, iPhones have negatively contributed to physical social interaction and created dependency and unhealthy addiction in users, which appears to portend the decline of some of humanities’ basic skills such as hand printing.
Thanks to iPhones, people can communicate with others without being physically present, and this has led to them relegating the importance of face-to-face conversation in interpersonal communication. This often happens when someone has bad news to deliver and may opt to avoid sharing it face-to-face, so that he/she does not have to deal with another person’s reactions. Therefore, people with communication phobias and those who are nervous during conversations will find solace in the use of iPhones, may never overcome them, and may be easily falling into internet addiction (Shepherd & Edelmann 2001, p. 520). Hence, communication is stunted in that unless one is using video conferencing, which is not common, one is not able to receive immediate nonverbal feedback, and this makes communication incomplete. Unfortunately, this also makes lying easier since the recipient of the information is not privy to the cues that will allow him/her to detect deceit.
Taking into consideration the use of emails and texts in communication, our writing skills will keep deteriorating, especially with technology such as iPads being introduced to young children in school. The majority of youths, especially in developed countries, rarely use a pen since they can send a text or email, which one can type on their iPhones. In addition, there is the aspect of absent-mindedness, since we can carry iPhones anywhere; we tend to overuse them, and often jeopardize our lives and those of others. For instance, driving while reading your email on the iPhone can result in accidents with fatal consequences since it interferes with the drivers’ attention (Svenson & Patten 2005, p. 182). The iPhones multiple features have also contributed a great deal to cell phone addiction and the pathological use of mobile phones, for surfing the internet, gaming and other activities have been subject to many studies related to behavioral addiction (Carbonell et al. 2009, p. 102).
Ultimately, in as much as I must concede that iPhones have brought many improvements to the way we communicate, their negative impact on our communication cannot be ignored. It has been posited that continued use of iPhones will persistently corrode the social communication by alienating and limiting social interaction. Therefore, it is important that we learn how to be in control and within the limits of social propriety when it comes to using iPhones; otherwise, the devices, which were designed for social interaction, may end up having a contrary effect.
Reference list
Carbonell, X, Guardiola, E, Beranuy, M & Bellés, A 2009, ‘ A Bibliometric analysis of the scientific literature on internet, video games, and cell phone addiction’, Journal of the Medical Library Association, vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 102-7.
Svenson, O & Patten, CJD 2005, ‘ Mobile phones and driving: A review of contemporary research’, Cognition, Technology & Work, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 182-197.
Kroski, E 2008, ‘ What can you do with the mobile web?’ Library Technology Reports, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 16-32.
Shepherd, R & Edelmann, RJ 2001, ‘ Caught in the web’, Psychologist, vol. 14, no. 10, p. 520.