Modern Socialization

Did TV, Film, Internet, and mass entertainment hurt the arts or did have people found new ways of socializing?

Often arts practioners moan and groan about how increased competition for people's attention has drasitically lowered attendence and made it very difficut to reach audiences. Needless to say we should be using these mediums to reach audiences - and we aren't doing that enough, but I want to pose a different hypothesis. What if what has really changed is how people socialize and how conversation about events is generated? And what do we do if the hypothesis is true?

Let's look at how over the years people have entertained themselves. It used to be that people would gather in someone's drawing room or home, and read, sing, and entertain one another. Or go to the theatre or the opera to see a performance. People sought out group experiences and these experiences lead to conversations.

What technology allows is for people to "experience" something individually but they can still maintain the conversation. The technoligy allows each person to expereince the same thing. This is what the solidiaryreading a book has always provided. We live in an ON DEMAND culture in a CONNECTED WORLD. TV shows, YouTube video, Blogs, and Movies (which most people watch at home or on netflix anyway) are experienced by individuals or in very small groups but they are the topics of "mass" conversations.

I recently joined facebook, twitter, plaxo and a whole slew of social networking sites. Even though I am a total technology junkie, it took me a long time to come around to social networking. I just didn't get it. But all of a sudden I am aware of what is happening moment to moment in friends and aquaintances lives. I am actually closer to several friends because of the technology. It was the same feeling I had when instant messaging became so popular or current day texting. It is a "live conversation" more often than not. Everyone has the story of some kids they know sitting within 3 feet of one another texting.

Live seems to imply in person, but really doesn't it mean real-time? If it does, what does LIVE theatre really mean? Look at the simulcasts that the MET is doing - it is changing the opera world. Is that a live performance. Do you need to be in the same room to have a live experience? Is it now true that an individual experience is also group experience?

Is email helping us or hurting us?

After that very positive post about technology, I have to explore something I think is really becoming an issue in the world – email.

I prefer to communicate mostly through email in all of my negotiations and communications. I realized while I was unable to type on my own, that I communicate almost exclusively through email or in person—more often through email. I use the phone to talk to my family, when I have to have an answer immediately, or when forced by the fact that someone else doesn’t have email (seriously in this day and age, it should be a rule that you have to have email). But for all of my own leanings towards the use of email, I think it is a detriment to a successful working environment. Everyone talks about it ruining the way people write, but I am talking about erosion of the work environment.

First and foremost, the tone of an email is normally indecipherable. We add all sorts of hint to our readers as to what tone they should read the email with J, tee hee, L, ALL CAPS, etc. Yet each day I find myself puzzling over what someone might have meant when they said something really simple like “That’s great!” Do they really mean that is it great, are they being sarcastic and they are really pissed off? I waste hours on this weekly.

Second, I find myself and others I know employing email as an offensive strategy. I send emails to make sure I have it in writing and that the person I am sending it to knows a deadline, an interpretation, or an opinion. I often find when a staff member brings a problem to me, I say “well write an email so you have proof of what you were saying. It is back-up for some imagined future conflict – which I often think we will into fruition.

Third, reply all is the biggest contributor to misunderstanding and to endless confusion. People don’t read all the responses before replying. It makes conversations that should be had in person a confrontational environment for no reason, except that people frustrated, are up in arms, defensive, and plain old over it because of all the emails and confusion.

Fourth, people send out these large group emails to everyone they think should be involved in a discussion or decision or need to know when something is decided. This brings a whole group into discussion instead of going to the one or two people who should make a decision efficiently and then send the SOLUTION to all that need to know. This makes things simply drag on FOREVER. Or worse, people who didn’t need to be involved in the first place are mad at the fact they weren’t listen too. (Sorry folks the world can’t be run by a giant committee).

Fifth, who cares about phones, but when I am emailing with the person who is sitting in the next room shouldn’t I just go meet with the person and discuss it. Am I being lazy? Am I using it as an offensive stance to make sure that I have it in writing and there is no confusion and documentation? Am I afraid where the conversation will lead? If so, should I address that not hide behind an email?

I could go on and on and on about this, but I think we as leaders need to break free of the albatross.

From here on out:

I hope I can send emails to the appropriate person or people so that I can find the answer and then let the group know what the solution is.

I will try to break the reply all chain.

I will get out of my chair and seek out folks to have a conversation, and if necessary, we can take notes the old fashion way. Imagine writing with pen and paper!

If I feel I need to confirm something, I am going to actually confirm it with the person and make sure we agree and understand each other.

I will be conscientious of the “tone” of my email and try to be concise but kind.

Technology can make life easier!

First and foremost, I must admit I love my blackberry.

In the age of the I-phone , I am utterly torn between my loyalty to the device that changed my life and a new design revolution.

Most people would find my statement that my blackberry changed my life SAD. But for someone who is constantly worried about being out of touch or not knowing what is going on it is a relief. It is the same comfort that I take in living less than a mile from the theatre. Because I am so close and because everyone can reach me via email to let me know what is going on, I am comfortable enough to leave the office, to step away. I am even getting very good about how often I check my email because in a situation where I am needed people can call me, email me or heck even drive over to my house to find me (this has happened actually several times when I spend a day in the garden). I have actually learned to turn off the world precisely because I know it can be turned on so quickly!