The Place of the Spoken Word in the Information Age

I've started the School Library Media program at the University of Georgia with the aim of becoming a Media Specialist. One of the classes I am taking this semester is on technology and relies heavily on online discussion and short written assignments.

In an assignment I am working on I found myself thinking about Ong's claim that people from literate cultures think differently than people from primary oral cultures. I began to realize that, in all likelihood, the Internet (and all that comes with it) is rewiring our minds again. Knowing that we can get information instantly. Knowing that we can disseminate information instantly. Connecting with people anywhere in the world with video conferencing. These things change the way we communicate and the way we solve problems.

Writing provides us with external storage space. We don't have to keep all of our thoughts and computations in our brain. The paper is an extension of our brain. Now the Internet is one big brain extension shared by the world. When the external component of our brain has changed so drastically, the brains inside our heads must be changing to keep up.

Then the question becomes, if our brains are actually changing to better interface with advanced information technology, where does the spoken word fit in? Is there still a place for face to face conversations and live performances in the information age?

The goal of this post is to pose the question, not to answer it. I would like to do some more investigations, but I suspect I will be answering this question for the rest of my professional life. I believe the spoken word does have a place - not just because I want to, but because I still witness it's power on a daily basis. But there is no doubt that, like so many things, how the spoken word serves us today is changing and will continue to change.

Telephone

I was talking to my sister on the phone last night. During the middle of one of my sentences she started laughing. But I wasn't saying anything I would expect her to laugh at, so I was a little put off. I thought maybe she was laughing at something she was looking at or heard unrelated to me. But I wanted to know what it was. "Why were you laughing?" I asked her. She didn't respond right away which put me off even more. Finally we realized there was a time delay.

I have already mentioned that timing is an important element of speech and can aid in understanding. Clearly, bad timing can also hinder understanding. But is talking on the phone really a good illustration of the spoken word in action?

Nope. Telephone conversations are an example of what Ong calls "secondary orality." The progression of written communication opens up new opportunities for spoken communication as well. Talking on the telephone is possible because of writing.

And it is different from talking to someone in person, as my example demonstrates. Talking face to face isn't just about the words coming out of your mouth. It is also about facial expressions and gestures. It is about being in the same spacial and temporal context.

When you talk on the phone you can't see what the other person is doing. You aren't looking at the same things. And, if there is a problem with your connection, the person you are talking to might not hear what you say right when you say it.