Towards a Communication Dialectic: Embedded Technology and the Enhancement of Place*

Abstract

Communication literature traditionally divides interaction into two forms: mass media and interpersonal communication. These ideal types are unquestionably useful heuristic tools. Yet their conceptual utility is often undermined when researchers place them at opposite ends of a linear, historical transformation in which mass media technology is believed to supplant interpersonal communication and the locations in which it occurs. This article abandons the polar, historical relationship in favor of a communication dialectic that recognizes the synthesis of ideal types into composite forms of interaction. Embedded technology demonstrates the dialectic by exploring how electronic media fixed within a physical location can combine with the interpersonal communication taking place there to enhance group interaction. The resulting hybrid defies the assumption that mass media simply displace interpersonal interaction, pointing instead to a dialectic relationship in which ideal types continually challenge and transform one another.Communication literature traditionally divides interaction into two major forms: mass media and interpersonal communication. Mass media are generally defined as one-directional, impersonal communications emanating from a central source to a dispersed and often powerless audience (see, e.g., Beniger 1986; Delia 1987; Ferrarotti 1988; Home 1986). Interpersonal communication, on the other hand, is characterized by two-way, face-to-face interaction between co-present actors (see, e.g., Goffman 1963Goffman , 1981.These ideal types are unquestionably useful heuristic tools, providing an analytical framework by which communication in many settings can be conceptualized. Yet their conceptual utility is often undermined by the tendency to historicize the ideal type relationship. Many researchers place mass media and interpersonal communication at opposite ends of a linear, historical transformation in which mass media displace interpersonal communication and the physical locations in which it occurs (Beniger 1986;Ferrarotti 1988; Home 1986; Innis 1950;Meyrowitz 1985).Confining ideal types within the context of a historical "revolution" limits their utility as abstract guides. Interpersonal communication is reduced to a dying breed, a metaphor for traditional, integrated, homogeneous patterns of social organization. Mass media, on the other hand, become a metaphor for the differentiation, heterogeneity, and anonymity of postmodem life-styles and often are

On and Off the Stage at Atlanta Greek Picnic: Performances of Collective Black Middle-Class Identities and the Politics of Belonging

“…Earlier studies have accused mass media of creating greater anomie and isolation (Broom and Selznick 1958;DeFleur and BallRokeach 1982;Giner 1976;Horne 1986;Jaspers 1951;Mannheim 1943;Nisbet 1953), but the forms of social media that predominate actually encourage direct social interaction that is reported through digital micro-blogging via text, photographs, and videos. Digital communities therefore do not subvert locality but rather transcend it (Bromley 2010;Casalegno 2004;Meyrowitz 1997;Purcell 1997). Kristen Purcell argues that embedded technology "overcomes the social isolation and limited interpersonal interaction that often characterize large gatherings by connecting group members on a level other than the physical" (1997:109).…”

“…Mass media offers a medium where the core, collectively agreed upon values of a group are able to be presented on a mass scale, and shared response to such mass scale messages are able to strengthen the relationship of the group (Purcell 1997). Mass media becomes the site at which the group is able to be created, defined, perpetuated, and transformed at the macro-level, and in the process some ideas are being omitted or rejected and are therefore assisting in defining the boundaries of the group (Cerulo et al 1992;Marwick and boyd 2010;Purcell 1997).…”

“…Mass media becomes the site at which the group is able to be created, defined, perpetuated, and transformed at the macro-level, and in the process some ideas are being omitted or rejected and are therefore assisting in defining the boundaries of the group (Cerulo et al 1992;Marwick and boyd 2010;Purcell 1997). Frequent and regular digital communication allows members of the group to create relationships with each other that mimic locality-based relationships.…”

“…Interaction takes place in both physical and digital spaces, often simultaneously, and these interactions are no less organic than those interactions that take place in person (Casalegno 2004;Johnston and Longhurst 2010;Purcell 1997). The notion of the pseudoGemeinschaft is particularly salient in the case of black Greeks where the smallest fraternity has 70,000 members and the smallest sorority has 100,000 members, and these members are not only located across the United States but also internationally.…”

Webs of support and engaged accountability: weaving community and making meaning of learning and teaching in an information age

“…She is pointing out that these terms themselves privilege face-to-face connections as more "real" than computer-mediated connections and relationships. Purcell (1997), another contemporary sociologist, also argues against the notion that face-to-face social interaction is the best, or the only "real" interaction. According to Purcell:…”