In the Trendspotter’s Guide to New Communications by Frances Cairncross, a collection of predictions were posited by the author with regard to the wonders and what-the-er’s of communication technology. The author gave thirty trends that will take place in the future as communication technology invades our personal and professional transactions and relational dimensions.
Among the thirty trends, I strongly agree with the prediction “people as the ultimate resource” and strongly disagree with the prediction “death of distance.”
It is true that technology improved connections, inverted home and office, and multiplied ideas to an extraordinary extent. All of these wouldn’t have been the case if not for the human capital that provided the procedures, systems, programs, physical and mental force, and purposeful initiatives in the enhancement of technological applications.
It is man who gives out the message, who creates communities of culture, who generates torrents of information, who losses privacy, and who requires improved writing and reading skills; hence, the objective and output of communication technology will always be geared toward the upgrading of man’s living conditions. Without man, without people as resources, there will be no objective and output, and there will be no communications and technological revolutions.
Indeed, man should use communication technology to his advantage and not to his destruction. Man should always be the head, and technology the arms and hands in the conduct of his premeditated deeds. While I strongly agree and agree with most of Cairncross’ predictions, I would like to expound as to why I disagree in utmost conviction with one of the posited trends.
In a qualitative sense, interpersonal communication occurs when people treat one another as unique individuals, regardless of the context in which the interaction occurs or the number of people involved. It is in this context that we can include issues about intimacy and distance which are two factors to be considered in any interpersonal communication.
We must understand that intimacy has different dimensions, and they are physical, intellectual, emotional, and shared activities. Given that technology can connect people despite the physical distance through shared activities like the internet, mobile phones, and other hi-end devices, technology still cannot cover the intellectual and emotional dimensions of distance. Despite the wireless channels provided by communication innovations, the intellectual and emotional dimensions are still founded on different aspects such as education and social status for the intellectual dimension and diversity and commonality for the emotional dimension.
Furthermore, distance can be physically wiped out by technology, but technology cannot abolish the need of people for distance. Indeed, distance is part of human communication. Why? It is impossible to have a close relationship with everyone, and even the strongest of interpersonal relationships requires some distance. Yes, I disagree that technology can totally eliminate distance in the purest form of human communication.