Today an acting assembly focused on technology and miscommunication, specifically with texting and faceless social networking.  Most situations in which this occurs are funny and humorous, as a result of silly answers to text messages, thanks to faulty Autocorrect and spellcheck problems. Friends can’t detect sarcasm or humor in texts like they can in face-to-face conversations. Some texting or social networking sites cause tragedies, such as an episode where a mother targeted a girl by pretending to be a boy of the girl’s age on MySpace, and after being chronically cyber-bullied, the girl took her own life. These sort of dramatic episodes seem like they are too extreme to be real, but in fact, texting and the Internet have clandestine power over social situations and interpersonal relationships.

Texting in particular is a very peculiar form of communication. As our guest speaker about texting (see entry “txtmelol:)”) discussed in a follow-up interview, texts spread virally and conversations reach beyond the scope of physical contact. These conversations are usually only a few words, so texting is better with breadth rather than depth.

Social experimentation is an integral piece of social media, and testing the limits and reactions of the  public incorporates the psychological aspects of such media. Social settings, such as Starbucks or libraries, combined with social media, such as texting or phone calls, might yield some interesting reactions to disruptions in daily life or virtual life, thanks to media. For example, if texting or a phone call distracts someone in line to order, how would the rest of the rushed customers react? If someone’s phone consistently went off in a place meant for work, like a library, would the other library users take action? Do people listen in on phone conversations and read text messages over shoulders like we listen to conversations at the next table over? How observant are other cell phone users when they are distracted by their phones?