At Lunchtime on Wednesday (20 May), I received a completely unexpected telephone call from the Radio 4 "PM" programme. The Roman Catholic Bishop of Paisley, the Rt Rev Philip Tartaglia, had issued a warning to Catholics in Scotland that Twitter could damage real human relationships, and PM were looking for a clergy-person to disagree with him. Somehow, through the wonders of Internet searching, they had found me, and they wanted to know whether I could take part in an on-air discussion on the subject.
Since I'm never one to turn down the chance of a good discussion I agreed, subject to clearing it with my Diocesan Communications Officer and, if she deemed necessary, my Bishop. In the event, the discussion was not with Bishop Tartaglia but with the well-known Roman Catholic journalist, Joanna Bogle. I found myself sitting in a little room at Radio Hereford & Worcester recording a conversation with Ms Bogle in London - somewhat ironically, since we both agreed on the value of face-to-face contact and body language, we could only hear and not see each other.
The main difficulty for me was that, in many ways, I agreed with Ms Bogle's emphasis on the need for personal contact, and I expect that most other "twitterers" would have done too. Of course there is no substitute for face-to-face contact, for sharing a cup of tea with someone, shaking their hand or giving them a hug - no-one knows that better than a parish priest, whether Anglican or Roman Catholic. Of course old friends are important and should not be displaced by new ones made over the Internet. But why can these two aspects of friendship not run side-by-side? A very dear friend of 15 years' standing introduced me to Twitter; he lives some distance away and we now have more frequent contact than we've had since the days when we attended the same church. It is still great to see him and his family, but distance means this cannot happen more than a few times a year at most. My friendship with him is not diminished by the fact that we now both have online friends who join in with our conversations. Of course it is important for children and young people to be careful about the people they are in touch with, and for parents to exercise proper control. But isn't this just as true in the "real" world?
Many of my online friends are people that I would like to meet face-to-face some time, but who knows whether it will ever possible, living all over the UK and beyond as they do? Some too are people who do not find it easy to get out, and to whom it is a boon to be able make contact with people via their computers. Strangely, the Bishop is quoted in the Telegraph as referring to making friendships with "real people", as if those of us who twitter are actually not real; my online friends are real people, but I would have been unlikely to meet them in any other way. It is amazing how much you can get to know about people by exchanging views in 140 character snatches - to be honest I wouldn't have believed it either until I tried it! It's certainly good discipline for thinking about how to say something concisely - perhaps my congregation will see the benefit in my sermons?!
Not surprisingly, the weirdest part of the whole experience was listening to the broadcast interview. I am used to the fact that our voices never sound quite the same played back to us as they sound when we speak - even if I play back a message I've left on our answering machine, I think "Is that really me?" However, I've had quite a bit of public speaking and media training through the years, and know that the main dangers are speaking too high or too fast, and if doing anything in public always make a very conscious effort not too. I was therefore more than surprised that I appeared to be gabbling in a rather high pitched voice. My husband who - poor man - has to listen to me all the time said that he thought I sounded as if I'd had a close encounter with a helium balloon! I wondered whether the tape might have been run slightly fast, but my co-interviewee seemed, if anything, to be talking in a slightly slower, deeper voice than I remembered. No doubt all part of the "unreality" of technology, whether the new phenomenon of Twitter or much older one of radio!
When my parents were children, radio technology was in its infancy, and the levels of communication that we have today were beyond imagining. When I was a child, there were two black and white TV channels that closed down with the National Anthem at 10.00pm. Whatever the future holds, I hope that I will always be able to use whatever technology is available to meet new people and broaden my outlook on life. I'm glad that there are others who feel the same! Happy twittering!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Wonderful, thoughtful post, Frances. Having listened to the discussion (and thoroughly enjoyed it, as you already know -- and not just because I got a passing mention!), I think you pretty much nailed the points extremely well.
As one of those people who, as you may have guessed, finds getting out and about a little difficult/tiring, I've been using the Internet for about twelve years. When I got my first account it was a dial-up connection of 22.8 kb per second (compared with my current 20 Mb per second!) and I've heard these arguments over and over. The common misconception, by those, usually, who never even attempt to use these technologies, is that they somehow replace "real life". I'm not quite so diplomatic in my response to this as you -- especially now, when the Internet is so obviously a part of the world in which live -- and I feel that such comments exhibit an extreme ignorance or, at best, an unwillingness to embrace tools (for that's what they ultimately are) that have the potential to enhance human interaction, creativity and, bottom line, communication. Given that my father of 65 now uses the Internet to find out things he would normally have either asked me about or read a book, I find these knee-jerk reactions actually quite unforgivable. I have a friend, furthermore, in her late 80s who's been online for years and her life like mine has been enriched by it.
The very idea that it somehow acts as a replacement always strikes me as something of a strawman. Those opposed to technology invent something about it that isn't necessarily true in order to attack it. Teenagers are commonly cited and, you know, it never, generally speaking, rings true to me. Just watch them, sometime, around town. Nine times out of ten they are with a bunch of their friends, holding rather wild and exuberant conversations whilst texting on their phones etc. It's a part of their lives, in the same way that television, that ancient technology radio, landline telephones, the lightbulb -- all of that is. They embrace it. They use it. For one or two, it becomes unhealthy. But that isn't about the technology. It's a symptom of something else, something that people like Bishop Tartaglia should be focusing on instead of trying to find rather cheap scapegoats.
We do have serious issues in need of addressing in our society. Twitter isn't one of them. Bravo to you.
Post a Comment