Discourse Processes

ISSN: 0163-853X (Print) 1532-6950 (Online) Journal homepage: [Link]

Internet-Based Communication

Morton Ann Gernsbacher

To cite this article: Morton Ann Gernsbacher (2014) Internet-Based Communication, Discourse
Processes, 51:5-6, 359-373, DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2014.916174
To link to this article: [Link]

Published online: 01 Jul 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1948

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

[Link]
Discourse Processes, 51:359–373, 2014
Copyright q Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0163-853X print/1532-6950 online
DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2014.916174

Internet-Based Communication
Morton Ann Gernsbacher
Department of Psychology
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Google the question, “How is the Internet changing the way we communicate?,”
and you will find no shortage of opinions, or fears, about the Internet altering
the way we communicate. Although the Internet is not necessarily making
communication briefer (neither is the Internet making communication less formal),
the Internet is manifesting our preference for writing over speaking. I propose that
our preference for communicating through Internet-based text derives from a
fundamental feature of writing: In contrast to speech, which is most often
synchronous, text is most often asynchronous.

INTRODUCTION

In this article I argue that the Internet provides a fruitful new avenue for studying
text and discourse. However, some readers might be wondering why scientists
want anyone to spend more time on the Internet. As it is, if the Internet craze
continues, we are destined to become a nation of morons. Just look around, and
you will see how many teenage girls hang out from morning to night on Facebook
and Snapchat, to the neglect of their school work and their mental health. And
don’t we all agree that YouTube, with its plethora of pratfall and cat videos,
threatens to change us into creatures with eyeballs as big as cantaloupes with no
brains at all? And what about the mental laziness enabled by our being able to

This article is based on Morton Ann Gernsbacher’s 2013 Distinguished Scientific Contribution
Award talk at the 2013 Society for Text and Discourse Annual Meeting in Valencia, Spain.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Morton Ann Gernsbacher, University
of Wisconsin-Madison, 1202 W. Johnson Street, Madison, WI 53706, USA. E-mail: magernsb@
[Link]

359
360 GERNSBACHER

Google anything we can’t remember? Surely, Internet-based search engines

create forgetfulness because people who search the Internet stop searching their
own memories.
So why should text and discourse scientists flock to the Internet as a fruitful
new avenue for study? Isn’t Internet-based communication as a substitute for
live, in-person communication merely a spurious form of progress? Don’t we
agree that we should only be studying face-to-face communication not
mechanical Internet-based communication? And that we should join millions
of others in the . . . Musical Defense League.
Alas, the claim that Internet-based communication is a spurious form of
progress (“like a loom converting good wool into shoddy”) was not protesting
mechanical, Internet-based communication versus live, in-person communi-
cation. Rather, it was protesting mechanical (recorded) music versus live, in-
person music. In movie theaters. In the 1930s (Smithsonian, 2012). Figure 1
displays one of the ads the Musical Defense League placed in newspapers around
the United States in 1932 and 1933. The ads decried the advent of accompanying
motion pictures with recorded music rather than musicians performing live,
sitting in each and every movie theater, during each and every cinematic
screening. As Figure 1 illustrates, recorded music was deemed a robot’s lullaby
that would lull otherwise mature audiences back to infancy. However, as anyone
who has been to a movie theater in the past 85 years knows, the protest was not
successful.
As for the fear of the continued Internet craze leading to our becoming a nation
of morons, that fear was voiced in a 1950s commencement address, given by

FIGURE 1 Ad from September 15, 1930, Capital Times newspaper, Madison, Wisconsin.
 INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION 361

Boston University’s president, who was referring to that era’s craze: television
(Time, 1950). Similarly, the claim about YouTube changing us into creatures
with eyeballs as big as cantaloupes with no brains at all? That, too, was a quote
from the 1950s, also about the fearful rise of TV, this time spoken by Fred Allen,
a radio personality (Sharbutt, 1978).
As for the public’s distress about so many teenage girls who hang out on
Facebook and Snapchat from morning to night, to the neglect of their school work
and their mental health? That fear dates back to the 18th century and the use of
those newfangled gadgets called novels. “Many young girls, from morning to
night, hang over this pestiferous reading, to the neglect of industry, health, proper
exercise, and to the ruin both of body and of soul” (Binhammer, 2003, p. 1). In his
1778 essay on morality and literacy, British schoolmaster Vicesimus Knox
opined that “If it be true that the present age is more corrupt than the preceding,
the great multiplication of novels has probably contributed to its degeneracy,
because fifty years ago there was scarcely a novel in the kingdom” (as cited in
Brantlinger, 1998, p. 1). Other 18th century scholars predicted that “the increase
of novels will help to account for the increase of prostitution and for the
numerous adulteries and elopements that we hear about” (Binhammer, 2003,
p. 1). Indeed, in a list of presenting ailments recommending admission to the
Trans-Allegheny Lunatic Asylum, we find novel reading adjacent to
nymphomania and opium addiction (Jerreat, 2013).
As for Google rotting our memories? That declaration was made by Socrates
about the invention of writing: “This discovery of yours will create forgetfulness
in the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories.” Indeed, Socrates
believed those who relied on the written word, including me as an author and you
as a reader, “will appear to be omniscient, but will generally know nothing; they
will be tiresome company, having the show of wisdom but without the reality”
(Plato, c. 370 BC).

THE INTERNET IS BECOMING UBIQUITOUS

Because I was a child of the 1950s who witnessed the advent of numerous
important technological inventions, such as seat belts, the microchip, the cardiac
pacemaker, and the antibiotic, tetracycline (as well as Barbie Dolls, Mr. Potato
Head, McDonalds restaurants, and drive-in movies), I was imprinted on the
power of technology. As for the Internet, I am particularly struck with its
amazingly fast saturation speed. By saturation speed, we mean the number of
years required to achieve saturation through half of all households. For the
telephone, saturation through U.S. households took over 50 years; for air
conditioning, saturation took nearly 30 years. For the automobile, it took over 20
362 GERNSBACHER

years. However, for the Internet, saturation has been achieved in a remarkable
dozen years, second only in saturation speed to the smartphone (Dediu, 2012).
Nearly 8 of 10 North Americans, 6.5 of 10 Europeans, and 6 of 10
Australasians use the Internet daily (Internet World Stats, 2012). Drilling down to
look at only my home country, the United States, men are just as likely as women
to use the Internet daily (85% and 84%). Black non-Hispanic Americans (85%)
are just as likely as White non-Hispanic Americans (86%) to use the Internet
daily, with only a small dip for Hispanic Americans (76%). Americans who live
in urban areas are just as likely to use the Internet daily (86%) as Americans who
live in suburban areas (86%), with just a small decrease for those who live in rural
areas (80%). Although daily Internet use is somewhat tied to a person’s annual
salary, over three fourths of Americans who live in poverty access the Internet
daily (Pew Research Center, 2013).
As in many countries, it is the younger adults who go online most frequently;
for example, 98% of Americans age 18 to 29 and 92% of Americans age 30 to 49
use the Internet daily. But more than half of U.S. senior citizens use the Internet
daily (Pew Research Center, 2013). It is this older age group who is
demonstrating the most rapid increase in Internet usage. In just a few years, when
the rest of the baby boomers join this age group, the age-Internet use disparity
will undoubtedly diminish (Madden, 2010).
We use the Internet for e-mail, with 150 billion messages sent per day, of
which 69% are spam (Radicati Group, 2012). We use the Internet for social
media, spending an average 3.2 hours a day on sites such as Facebook, where 500
million people log in every day; Twitter, where 175 million tweets are sent every
day, and YouTube, where 4 billion videos are viewed every day (Pring, 2012). On
Instagram, 40 million photos are uploaded every day and 1,000 comments are
made every second, along with 8,500 likes (Valant, 2013). However, one of the
newest social media eclipses its adolescent siblings: Snapchat users send an
astounding 400 million photos and videos each day (Colao, 2014).
Other social media include Google þ, where the Dalai Lama hangs out with
Desmond Tutu (Marya, 2011), and LinkedIn, whose membership includes
executives from every Fortune 500 company ([Link]). Half of 18- to 34-
year-olds check Facebook as soon as they wake up each day, and nearly a third do
so on their mobile phones before getting out of bed (Pring, 2012).
In regions of the world that have less access to computers, mobile and
smartphone use is burgeoning. For example, there are nearly a quarter billion
mobile smartphone users in Africa (Chetty, 2013). The World Bank reports that
in some countries, citizens are more likely to have access to a mobile phone than
they are to a bank account, electricity, or clean water (Kelly & Minges, 2012).
Citizens of countries such as Kenya, Tanzinia, and Ethiopia are willing to pay as
much as 25% of their monthly income to have mobile phone access (Hersman,
2009).
 INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION 363

Africans “use their mobile phones for everything” (Murray, 2012): socializing
with friends and family both near and far away, paying for goods and services,
and even interacting with their governments (Chetty, 2013). African farmers use
their smartphones to trade crops and to check on market prices (Smith, 2009).
African children use smartphones to receive educational materials, and African
teens use smartphones to engage in peer-to-peer tutoring (Murray, 2012). For
persons without access to electricity, they charge their smartphones through car
batteries located in the village (Smith, 2009).
Mobile smartphones, and ergo access to the Internet, are becoming ubiquitous
throughout the world. When the Reddit community was recently asked what
would be the most difficult thing to explain if someone from the 1950s suddenly
appeared today, the most up-voted response—among the 12,000 answers this
question received—was the following: “I possess a device, in my pocket, that is
capable of accessing the entirety of information known to man. I use that device
to look at pictures of cats and get in arguments with strangers” (Nuseramed, 2013).

HOW IS THE INTERNET CHANGING THE WAY WE COMMUNICATE?

Google the question, “How is the Internet changing the way we communicate?,”
and you will find no shortage of opinions, and fears, about Internet-based
communication altering the way we think, write, and speak (Arnett, 2012;
Chopra, 2013; Leonardi, 2012; and the mother lode, nearly 200 essays in
response to The Edge Annual Question [Brockman, 2010], “How is the Internet
changing the way you think?”).
Internet-based communication is not necessarily less formal (Baron, 2002;
Feenberg, 1989). Sure, some of us raised our eyebrows when we saw Dr. Francis
Collins, Director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the world’s largest
medical research and funding agency, end his tweet about the U.S. Supreme
Court case decision disallowing DNA patenting, with the slang expression, “Woo
Hoo!!!” (complete with triple exclamation points; Collins, 2013).
However, textual slang dates back centuries. For example, in an exasperated
letter to Winston Churchill in 1917, Lord Fisher not only used double
exclamation points (“some headlines in the newspapers have utterly upset me!
Terrible!!”) but also used the abbreviation OMG! (“I hear that a new Knighthood
is on the tapis – OMG!”; Locker, 2012). Similarly, emoticons, like those smiley
faces composed of colons and parentheses, are nothing new. They arrived in text
in the late 1800s, as soon as the typesetters of Puck magazine could rejigger their
typesetting machine, as shown in Figure 2.
Internet-based communication is not necessarily briefer. Very few
contemporary text messages can match the brevity of a postal letter written in
1862 by the noted author Victor Hugo. Hugo had just completed his latest novel,
364 GERNSBACHER

FIGURE 2 Column from March 30, 1881, Puck magazine, vol. 212, p. 65.

Les Miserables, and had gone away on a vacation. But he was understandably
anxious to learn how the book was selling. Therefore, he wrote his publisher the
following letter:

Indeed, his correspondence comprised only one character, a question mark.

Hugo’s publisher responded just as tersely:

!
We might grouse when we hear that authors are now using Twitter, with its
140-character limit, to pen short stories. But Guatemalan author Augusto
Monterroso beat the 140-character limit back in 1959, with his ultra-short story,
“El Dinosaurio,” the entirety of which is “Cuando despertó, el dinosaurio todavı́a
estaba allı́.” (“When she or he awoke, the dinosaur was still there.”). Short forms
of formal communication have been with us for centuries.
Thus, the Internet is not making communication briefer. Neither is the Internet
making communication less formal. We have always had brief forms of
communication, even in writing, and we have always used written
communication in informal modes. But the Internet and the smartphone are
changing one way that we communicate: Internet-based communication is
manifesting either our latent or a newfound preference for written
communication over spoken communication—for text over discourse.
 INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION 365

INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION MANIFESTS A PREFERENCE

FOR WRITTEN COMMUNICATION

As heralded by the title of Clive Thompson’s (2010) article, “On the Death of the
Phone Call,” we are witnessing a steady decrease in communicating by spoken
telephone call. In its wake, we are witnessing a steady increase in communicating
by written text message. U.S. teenagers are leading the pack, each sending, on
average, over 4,000 text messages a month (Nielsen, 2011). But even senior
citizens are gravitating toward texting. U.S. adults over age 65 send, on average,
two text messages a day, as demonstrated by NBA basketball player Kevin
Durant’s grandmother, who texted to congratulate his team, the Oklahoma City
Thunder, on their win over the Phoenix Suns (“Thunder struck again & the Sun(s)
went down (Great W)! Love u g mom”), and to add some old-fashioned
grandmother scolding (“Kev kev stop cussing so much [because the TV cameras]
be showing u when u do”), to which the dutiful 6’9” grandson apologized (“sorry
grandma I be so emotional, I love u”; Devine, 2013).
The more we text message each other, the less we phone call. Indeed, The New
York Times asks: Why talk when you can text? (Midlin, 2010). Nielsen (as cited
in Midlin, 2010) reports that “Teenagers growing up now don’t even think the
phone is primarily for voice. It’s primarily for text.” The phone call is becoming
so passé that a recent cartoon demonstrating a tongue-in-cheek flow chart for
choosing the appropriate communication mode placed phone calling at the end of
the line, only slight above the recommendation to “Try smoke signals, gramps”
(Paul & MacNaughton, 2013). In response to U.S. President Obama’s “We The
People” mechanism, for which heavily endorsed petitions are forwarded to the
President himself, there is a petition to make it a felony to respond to a text
message with a phone call ([Link]).

FIGURE 3 Synchronous and asynchronous modes of speaking and writing.

366 GERNSBACHER

Thus, the major influence the Internet is having on the way we communicate is
by manifesting our preference for writing over speaking. But why? I propose that
the preference for written communication derives from a fundamental feature
of writing: It is most often asynchronous. In contrast, speaking is most often
synchronous, as when we converse face-to-face or talk on the phone. As
illustrated in Figure 3, although forms of writing exist that are synchronous (e.g.,
Internet-relay chat [IRC], which operates as synchronous text-messaging) and
technologically supported forms of speaking exist that are asynchronous (e.g.,
recorded lectures and voice mail), there are many more forms of asynchronous
written communication than asynchronous spoken communication. It is writing’s
asynchrony that I propose underlies the preference for writing over speaking that
the Internet is manifesting.

INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION MANIFESTS A PREFERENCE

FOR ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION

Asynchronous text-based communication dates back to the invention of writing.

All of today’s popular modes of asynchronous Internet-based communication
have precursors in the pre-Internet era. For instance, Facebook and other Internet-
based discussion boards were predated with community bulletin boards. One
member of the community would post (with literal thumbtacks) onto a (physical)
bulletin a written message or document (Ride Needed; Garage Sale Tomorrow).
Other persons came along later, read the initial posting, and perhaps added to it.
Then, another person posted another written message or document, and the cycle
continued.
Thirty-five years ago, one of the ways I asynchronously communicated with
colleagues during graduate resembled e-mail. Whenever I wanted to set up a
meeting with my advisor or arrange lunch with another graduate student, I
walked to the departmental mailbox room. There, beside the wooden cubbies all
of us were assigned, lay a pad of hot pink “While You Were Out” notes. I wrote
my message on one of the notes, tucked it into the recipient’s mailbox, and waited
until the person replied to my note by writing on it and tucking it back into my
mailbox. All of us walked by that wall of mailboxes multiple times a day, sending
messages or receiving messages, much like we use e-mail in current day. (Indeed,
we used these departmental mailboxes for file sharing: If we wanted to share a
file, we simply paper-clipped the note onto the file folder and stuck that into the
person’s mailbox.)
One of Twitter’s precursors was the car bumper sticker, which reached its
peak popularity in the 1960s and 1970s (Hubert, 2005). Like Tweets, the
messages on bumper stickers were also limited in length, and, like Tweets,
bumper sticker communication was designed for large-scale broadcast. Bumper
 INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION 367

sticker communication ran the gamut of advertising, imparting personal and

political opinions (“discursive political dialogues”; Salamon, 2005), and
documenting the communicator’s achievements (e.g., “My Child Is an Honor
Student at . . . ”; Baker, 2011). The popularity of bumper stickers, as a short-form
of communication, has diminished so much over the past couple of decades that
archivists call for the historical preservation of what was once a “seemingly
ubiquitous” short-form of communicating a “range of historical and social events
and trends” (Baker, 2011, p. 268).
A precursor to the text message was the venerable telegram, the last of which
was sent in the summer of 2013, completing a three-century stride (Associated
Press, 2013). Telegrams were, by practice, a form of brief communication because
users were charged by the word. Indeed, the bulk of Nelson Ross’s 1928
publication, How To Write Telegrams Properly: A Small Booklet, instructed
telegram users in the fine art of telegram-chat (e.g., “A man high in American
business life has been quoted as remarking that elimination of the word ‘please’
from all telegrams would save the American public millions of dollars annually.”)
A telegram announced the Wright brothers’ invention of aviation (“Successful
four flights Thursday morning.”) and the Titanic’s demise (“SOS SOS CQD CQD
Titanic. We are sinking fast. Passengers are being put into boats.”). A telegram
authored by the head of the British Navy in early September 1939 rivaled the
brevity and informality of many teen’s current day text messages (“Winston is
back”), as did physicist Edward Teller’s 1952 telegram reporting the detonation
of the first hydrogen bomb (“It’s a boy”; Alexander, 2009).
During the telegram’s heyday, 300 million were sent a year (Neuffer, 1987).
This form of brief, asynchronous text-based communication could be sent from
just about anywhere. A telegram addressed to “The President, White House,
Washington, D.C.” would reach the Chief Executive “if filed at any telegraph
office in the world” (Ross, 1928). And this very popular form of brief,
asynchronous text-based communication could be received just about anywhere,
as in the most likely apocryphal story of American short-story author, Dorothy
Parker, receiving a telegram from her editor, pestering her for overdue work—
during her honeymoon. According to the tale, Dorothy replied via telegram, “Too
****ing busy and vice-versa” (Forsyth, 2013).
In both the precursors to and the current instantiations of Internet-based text
communication, asynchrony is key. Asynchrony provides convenience, as the
National Science Foundation (2009) explains: “The popularity of [Internet-based
text communication] lies in its convenience. No more games of telephone tag, no
more staying late to wait for a phone call.” Such convenience was illustrated recently
when the Nobel Peace Prize committee was unable to contact its 2013 recipient
synchronously by telephone but were able to turn to Twitter (Dewey, 2013).
Parents overwhelming prefer communicating via asynchronous Internet-based
text to speaking synchronously on the phone when contacting their children’s
368 GERNSBACHER

pediatricians (for test results, scheduling appoints, or discussing a particular

symptom; Kleiner Akers, Burke, & Werner, 2002). Corporate employees, from
clerks to vice presidents, also overwhelmingly prefer communicating via
asynchronous Internet-based text to speaking synchronously on the phone (when
negotiating, explaining, clarifying, and exchanging quantitative and technical
information). As one employee relates: “If an issue requires back and forth
communication, I am much more comfortable on email. Messages are more
understandable since people have thought the message through” (El-Shinnawy &
Markus, 1997, p. 456).
College students, enrolled in traditional face-to-face courses, overwhelmingly
prefer to contact their professors through asynchronous forms of Internet-based
communication (e.g., e-mail or discussion board) than to ask questions in person
at the beginning or end of class, attend in-person office hours (which was
preferred by only a fraction of a large sample of university students), or telephone
the professor (not preferred by any student; Finley, Pitts, & Guo, 2010).
Professors also overwhelmingly prefer asynchronous forms of Internet-based
communication to synchronous, in-person forms when communicating with
students (Simonidesová & Hlavňová, 2013; although communication preferences
in courses taught completely online are less easy to interpret clearly).
Adolescents overwhelmingly prefer the “controllability” of asynchronous
forms of Internet-based communication when developing and maintaining
friendships (Peter & Valkenburg, 2006). As Thompson (2010) philosophizes:
“For all the hue and cry about becoming an ‘always on’ society, we’re actually
moving away from the demand that everyone be available immediately.”
Another attraction of text-based communication is its intransience. The written
word itself is intransient or permanent, whereas all but recorded speech is transient
(Feenberg, 1989; Frehner, 2008). Speech can go in one ear and out the other, as the
expression says, whereas text can be retrieved, reproduced, and searched. The
advantage of intransient text over more transient speech has been noted for decades
and undoubtedly motivated the decision in the 1960s to use a teletype machine as
the hotline between the U.S. Pentagon and the USSR’s Kremlin, rather than a bat
phone ([Link]). “I’m bound to have problems if I communicate numbers [via
phone],” confesses one business professional. “Who wants to sit with a paper and
pencil and jot down these numbers? I would much rather have it on email where I
can see it and print it if I so desire” (El-Shinnawy & Markus, 1997, p. 458).

EXAMPLE INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION

RESEARCH PROGRAM

Although the Internet is not making communication briefer (neither is the

Internet making communication less formal), the Internet is manifesting our
 INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION 369

preference for writing over speaking. I have argued that our preference for
communicating through Internet-based text derives from a fundamental feature
of writing: In contrast to speech, which is most often synchronous, text is most
often asynchronous. Thus, a primary way that the Internet is changing the way we
communicate is by manifesting our preference for asynchronous, intransient,
written communication over synchronous, transient spoken communication.
Researchers in the fields of computers and human interaction and computers
and education are already embracing the opportunity to study Internet-based
interaction and learning and, as a viable offshoot, Internet-based communication.
However, text and discourse researchers themselves have not fully seized the
opportunity. For instance, over the past decade of presentations at the annual
meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, only a few have presented
research focused on Internet-based communication, as have only a handful of
research articles published in the Society’s journal, Discourse Processes.
Two text and discourse researchers who are already embracing the opportunity
to study Internet-based communication are Michael Schober and Frederick
Conrad (2008). Schober and Conrad, long-time investigators of survey
interviewing, have recently moved their investigations to the Internet and
smartphones. Among the provocative results they have observed is the finding
that when respondents are allowed to complete a survey through asynchronous,
intransient text message rather than synchronous, intransient phone calls,
responses tend to be more accurate.
For instance, when allowed to complete a survey through text message rather
than telephone, respondents are less likely to straightline (respond similarly to a
series of items, suggesting that the repetitive responses might not be authentic;
Schober et al., 2012, 2013), respondents are less likely to satisfice (round off
answers, e.g., respond with a number divisible by 10 when asked how many
songs they have on their iPhone; Schober et al., 2012, 2013), and respondents are
less likely to fall prey to socially desirable responding (e.g., fail to admit to
having more than one sex partner, to binge drinking, to not attending religious
services, or to not exercising daily; Schober et al., 2012).
Schober and Conrad report that respondents who complete surveys through
text message take full advantage of the asynchrony that Internet-based text
communication affords: The respondents take more time in between
conversational turns, suggesting they might be multitasking—or simply ensuring
the verity of their responses (Schober et al., 2013). Respondents who complete
surveys through text message also take advantage of textual intransience:
The respondents rarely ask the interviewers to repeat the question (Schober et al.,
2013). Thus, Schober and Conrad’s work demonstrates not only that Internet-
based communication can be a fruitful avenue for research, but also that Internet-
based communication can be a fruitful avenue for conducting survey interviews.
370 GERNSBACHER

CONCLUSION

Let me conclude by returning to another one of those 1930s Musical Defense

League ads, which I presented at the outset (Figure 1). In another ad, the copy
asks, “When is that young man going home? This unwelcome suitor has been
wooing the muse for many dreary months without winning her favor. Patience of
the household seems about exhausted.” The ad continues, “If you, too, feel that
the cause of human happiness would be better served by the return of Living
Music to the theater, you can help to hand the robot his hat—just sign and mail
the coupon.” In current day, the request would be to click on an Internet petition,
which would be sent to the offending party—in this case, the canned music.
My point is that with the advantage of history behind us, we know that the
metaphorical young man in this ad never did go home. Canned music—non-live
music—became the norm in American cinemas, and I’m betting that Internet-
based communication (Internet-based discussion boards and even Internet-based
instruction) will also soon become the norm. Therefore, I encourage us, as
language researchers, to abide, if not openly welcome, the suitor—and to think of
the Internet as providing new avenues for the study of text and discourse.

REFERENCES

Alexander, H. (2009, November 4). Ten famous telegrams. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://
[Link]/news/uknews/6494297/[Link]
Arnett, E. (2012, August 11). Technology has changed the way we communicate. News-Graphic.
Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]
Associated Press. (2013, July 15). India sends its last telegram. Stop. The Telegraph. Retrieved from
[Link]
[Link]
Australia Post. (n.d.). About letters and letter writing. Australia Post Letter Writing. Retrieved from
[Link]
Baker, W. (2011). Soapbox for the automobile: Bumper sticker history, identification, and
preservation. Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals, 7, 251– 270.
Baron, N. S. (2002, December). ‘Whatever’: A new language model? Paper presented at the
Convention of the Modern Language Association, New York, NY.
Binhammer, K. (2003). The persistence of reading: Governing female novel-reading in memoirs of
Emma Courtney and memoirs of modern philosophers. Eighteenth-Century Life, 27, 1–22.
Brantlinger, P. M. (1998). The reading lesson: The threat of mass literacy in nineteenth-century
British fiction. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Brockman, J. (2010). How is the internet changing the way you think? Edge. Retrieved from http://
[Link]/annual-question/how-is-the-internet-changing-the-way-you-think
Chetty, L.-R. (2013, April 9). The social (studies) network: Africa’s cellular education revolution. The
Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from [Link]
tor/2013/0409/The-social-studies-network-Africa-s-cellular-education-revolution
 INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION 371

Chopra, K. (2013, September 17). The effects of social media on how we speak and write. Social
Media Today. Retrieved from [Link]
media-how-we-speak-and-write
Colao, J. J. (2014, January). The inside story of Snapchat: The world’s hottest app or a $3 billion
disappearing act? Forbes. Retrieved from [Link]
inside-story-of-snapchat-the-worlds-hottest-app-or-a-3-billion-disappearing-act/
Collins, F. S. (2013, June 13). SC: “A naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and is
not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated” Woo Hoo!!! Twitter. Retrieved from http://
[Link]/NIHDirector/status/345194268840849411
Dediu, H. (2012, April 11). When will smartphones reach saturation in the US? ASYMCO. Retrieved
from [Link]
Devine, D. (2013, January 16). Kevin Durant’s grandma doesn’t like it when he curses. Yahoo Sports.
Retrieved from [Link]
curses-175318667–[Link]
Dewey, C. (2013, October 11). This year’s Nobel Peace Prize winner was officially notified through
Twitter. Washington Post. Retrieved from [Link]
2013/10/11/this-years-nobel-peace-prize-winner-was-officially-notified-through-twitter
Dorman, M. (1998). Using e-mail to enhance instruction. Journal of School Health, 68, 260–261.
El-Shinnawy, M., & Markus, M. L. (1997). The poverty of media richness theory: Explaining people’s
choice of electronic mail vs. voice mail. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46,
443–467.
Feenberg, A. (1989). The written world: On the theory and practice of computer conferencing. In
R. Mason & A. Kaye (Eds.), Mindwave: Communication, computers, and distance education
(pp. 22–39). Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
Forsyth, M. (2013). The elements of eloquence: How to turn the perfect English phrase. London, UK:
Icon Books.
Frehner, C. (2008). Email, SMS, MMS: The linguistic creativity of asynchronous discourse in the new
media age. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang International Academic Publishers.
Hersman, E. (2009, April 19). Mobile phone access and usage in Africa. White African. Retrieved
from [Link]
Hubert, C. (2005, April 24). Bumper stickers losing popularity as tolerance, vehicle trends evolve.
Journal Gazette. Retrieved from [Link]
Ijsselsteijn, W. A., van Baren, J., & van Lanen, F. (2003). Staying in touch: Social presence and
connectedness through synchronous and asynchronous communication media. In C. Stephanidis &
J. Jacko (Eds.), Human-computer interaction: Theory and practice (Part II, pp. 924–928). New
York, NY: CRC Press.
Internet World Stats. (2012, June 20). World internet usage and population statistics. Retrieved from
[Link]
Jerreat, J. (2013, September 5). “Women trouble”, immorality and post traumatic stress from fighting
in the civil war: The reasons patients were admitted to a lunatic asylum in the 1800s. Daily Mail.
Retrieved from [Link] – 2413131/Immorality-post-traumatic-s
[Link]
Kelly, T., & Minges, M. (2012). IC4D 2012: Maximizing mobile. The World Bank. Retrieved from
[Link]
IC4D–[Link]
Kleiner, K. D., Akers, R., Burke, B. L., & Werner, E. J. (2002). Parent and physician attitudes
regarding electronic communication in pediatric practices. Pediatrics, 109, 740 –744.
Lapadat, J. C. (2002). Written interaction: A key component in online learning. Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication, 7. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2002.tb00158.x
372 GERNSBACHER

Lea, M. (1991). Rationalist assumptions in cross-media comparisons of computer-mediated

communication. Behaviour & Information Technology, 10, 153–172.
Leonardi, M. (2012, January). Social media–communications perspective. News and Events:
St. Ambrose University. Retrieved from [Link]
Media%E2%80%93Communications_Perspective.html
Li, L., Finley, J., Pitts, J., & Guo, R. (2010). Which is a better choice for student-faculty interaction:
Synchronous or asynchronous communication? Journal of Technology Research, 2, 1–12.
Lin, L., Cranton, P., & Bridglall, B. (2005). Psychological type and asynchronous written dialogue in
adult learning. Teachers College Record, 107, 1788– 1813.
Locker, M. (2012, November 29). OMG! First use of abbreviation found in a 1917 letter to Winston
Churchill. Time. Retrieved from [Link]
on-found-in-a-letter-to-winston-churchill
Lovejoy, T., & Grudin, J. (2003). Messaging and formality: Will IM follow in the footsteps of email?
In M. Rauterberg, M. Menozzi, & J. Wesson (Eds.), Human-computer interaction—INTERACT’03
(pp. 817 –820). Zurich, Switzerland: IOS Press.
Madden, M. (2010, August 27). Older adults and social media. Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Retrieved from [Link]
Marya, R. (2011, October 07). Dalai Lama joins Googleþ , plans hangout with Desmond Tutu.
Mashable. Retrieved from [Link]
Mindlin, A. (2010, October 17). So why talk when you can text? The New York Times. Retrieved from
[Link]
Murray, M. (2012, July 24). Kenyans use cell phones for everything from buying groceries to paying
rent. NBC News. Retrieved from [Link]
kenyans-use-cell-phones-for-everything-from-buying-groceries-to-paying-rent
National Science Foundation. (2009). The Internet: Changing the way we communicate. Arlington,
VA: Author. Available for download at [Link]
Neuffer, E. (1987, August 7). Telegrams are on the wane. New York Times. Retrieved from http://
[Link]/1987/08/07/style/[Link]
Nielsen. (2011, December 15). New mobile obsession: U.S. teens triple data usage. Mobile. Retrieved
from [Link]
[Link]
Nuseramed. (2013, January 4). If someone from the 1950s suddenly appeared today, what would be
the most difficult thing to explain to them about life today? Ask Reddit. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]/r/AskReddit/comments/15yaap/if_someone_from_the_1950s_suddenly_appeared_today/
c7qyp13
Paul, C., & MacNaughton, W. (2013, January 25). Contemplating Friday: Communication 101. Tech
Page One. Retrieved from [Link]
cation-101
Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2006). Research note: Individual differences in perceptions of Internet
communication. European Journal of Communication, 21, 213–226.
Pew Research Center. (2013). Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]/
Plato. (c. 370 BC). The Phaedrus—A dialogue between Socrates and Phaedrus written down by the
pupil of Socrates, Plato. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]
Pring, C. (2012, January 11). 100 social media statistics for 2012. The Social Skinny. Retrieved from
[Link] –2012/
Radicati Group. (2012). Email market 2012–2016. Palo Alto, CA: The Radicati Group, Inc.
Ross, N. E. (1928). How to write telegrams properly: A small booklet. Philadelphia, PA: Haldeman-
Julius Publications.
 INTERNET-BASED COMMUNICATION 373

Salamon, H. (2005). Ha’am in the turbulent discursive sphere of Israeli bumper stickers. Hebrew
Studies, 46, 197–234.
Schober, M. F., & Conrad, F. G. (2008). Survey interviews and new communication technologies. In
F. G. Conrad & M. F. Schober (Eds.), Envisioning the survey interview of the future (pp. 1–30).
New York, NY: Wiley.
Schober, M. F., Conrad, F. G., Antoun, C., Bowers, A. W., Hupp, A. L., & Yan, H. (2013, May).
Conversational interaction and survey data quality in SMS text interviews. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Boston, MA. Retrieved
from [Link]
Schober, M. F., Conrad, F. G., Antoun, C., Carroll, D., Ehlen, P., Fail, S., . . . Zhang, C. (2012, May).
Disclosure and quality of answers in text and voice interviews on iPhones. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Orlando, FL. Retrieved
from [Link]
Sharbutt, J. (1978, December 15). Eyes as big as cantaloupes. Nashua Telegraph. Retrieved from
[Link]
2C3400461
Simonidesová, J., & Hlavňová, B. (2013, October). The use of Internet communication forms and their
quality in the educational process in higher education. Paper presented at the International
Academic Workshop on Social Science (IAW-SC 2013), Changsha, Hunan, China.
Smith, D. (2009, January 3). Mobiles give Africa’s farmers the chance to set out their stall. The
Observer. Retrieved from [Link]
mobile-phones
Smithsonian. (2012, February 10). Musicians wage war against evil robots. Retrieved from http://
[Link]/paleofuture/2012/02/musicians-wage-war-against-evil-robots
Thompson, C. (2010, July 28). On the death of the phone call. Wired. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]/magazine/2010/07/st_thompson_deadphone/
Time. (1950, June 19). Radio: Morons & happy families. Retrieved from [Link]
magazine/article/0,9171,858841,[Link]
Typographical Art. (1881, March 30). Puck, 212, 65.
Valant, S. (2013, May 3). A day in the life of the Internet. Gator Crossing. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]/2013/05/02/a-day-in-the-life-of-the-internet/
Wang, Q., & Woo, H. L. (2007). Comparing asynchronous online discussions and face-to-face
discussions in a classroom setting. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 272 –286.