In-person exchanges

I whole-heartedly agree that social networking sites (SNS) cannot ever replace face-to-face (F2F) interaction. The aspects you mention, e.g., the paralinguistic cues (smirking, rolling of the eyes, etc.), the gestures, tone and intonation, even what the others are doing while they are meeting F2F (marking, reading e-mail, IMing) all impact the level of interaction and are quite indicative of each participant’s level of engagement.

Moreover, F2F may reveal more than we want. For instance, who wants to participate in something where attendees are more interested in what is happening on a monitor or sharing remarks with a seat-mate vs. the objective of the F2F encounter. I personally enjoy coffee over electronic exchanges anytime, but, as you said, circumstances (i.e., time and place) generally dictate the feasibility of meeting F2F. So meeting up via a SNS, synchronously or asynchronously, makes us create those connections that would be difficult for the most part. However, it is not just about “connecting”… there is much more to SNS.

Lately, I’ve been reading some research on social identity and how we create an online identity within our different SNS communities. Not much of a surprise ‘cause we do this in real life, remember Erving Goffman entitled his book “The Presentation of Self of Everyday Life” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Presentation_of_Self_in_Everyday_Life). But online, it is easier to “disguise” ourselves, signaling only certain qualities we wish to share. Everything online is pre-planned, rehearsed and edited. And like everyone else, what I share in what is my online identity provides a very distinctive, dare I say “better,” representation of who I am. Only you poor souls who know me see the “flawed” person I am.

Is it always better to meet F2F? I can’t always say yes. Each definitely has its own merit.