Real-Time, Real Challenges
The increase in participation that accompanies real-time conversation also carries
with it certain liabilities, most notably problems with the pace and depth of
conversations. Because everybody can talk at once, real-time discussion may move
too quickly for participants to keep up. Especially when a large group is
interested in the topic, electronic discussion can sometimes be frustrating because
the flow of the conversation can easily leave some of the participants behind.
The easiest way to solve this dilemma is to keep a transcript of the session. In a
full class discussion, your instructor will probably already be logging a transcript
for later reference. If not, or if this is a smaller group meeting, check to see
whether the software you use to access MU*s and IRCs has a feature that will let you
keep a log of the session. By keeping a transcript, you can return to the
discussion for later analysis, revisiting ideas, solidifying a topic that was
bounced around in a brainstorming session, or even quoting from the exchange.
Another way to help manage the flow of information in a real-time discussion is to
focus on the messages and threads of the conversation that interest you the most.
If you participate in one or two threads, you can concentrate on understanding the
depth of a particular issue and writing more incisive messages yourself. Your
instructor may also want to split the class into smaller groups so that discussion
will have a slower, more manageable pace.
A second problem is the temptation to just bounce around from point to point, making
quick, superficial comments that lack meaningful insight. Again, to counter this
tendency, concentrate on a limited number of threads and try to compose longer, more
thoughtful messages. Another strategy is to let the mediumıs tendencies work to
your advantage. Instead of trying to finalize your thesis in a real-time class
discussion, use the wealth of voices and perspectives to generate ideas. Youıll be
tapping into the strength of the medium by drawing on the benefits of increased
participation.
Though it is possible to turn the sometimes superficial nature of real-time to your
advantage, conversations can occasionally devolve beyond the level of superficiality
and become irresponsible, even offensive. Sometimes in real-time exchanges, people
send messages that actually shut down conversation. Just because you are not
literally ³getting in someone's face² doesn't mean that you can't do the electronic
equivalent in your writing. To avoid these unproductive confrontations, or at least
to keep healthy conflict from escalating to the level of a flame war, remember that
your words carry weight and meaning and that they will often reach a wide audience
when you send them out electronically.
Electronic conversations are curious in that messages seem strangely disembodied
from their speakers. Without being able to attach a face to a statement, we often
get the feeling that the words we see have been produced anonymously or created by
the computer rather than by a particular person. Weıve seen how this can help to
increase participation in a discussion; however, it also raises some important
concerns about responsibility and accountability. Although it might seem that an
electronic, real-time discussion has fewer constraints than face-to-face
interaction, in reality, these on-line conversations have a kind of permanence that
spoken discussions lack. Because itıs easy to produce and archive transcripts, the
messages that you send can be carefully reexamined at any time in the future, and
your conversation itself becomes a text that others may read and study. Perhaps
even more than in face-to-face conversations, then, you should be careful about the
things you say and the way you say them.
Adapted from Connections: A Guide to On-line Writing