I just did another phone interview this morning (actually it was over Skype). I think I see another way that IM interviews are different from voice: the way previous utterances are saved. IM is different from voice communication because speech is ephemeral. Once you say something, it’s gone. Even if you’re recording the exchange, you can’t review the recording during the conversation itself. But with IM, you can always scroll back and see that there was a point you wanted to come back to. So time is handled differently with regards to IM. This isn’t a novel observation, but it was just something that struck me after this morning’s regular old voice communication.
3 Replies to “Internet dogs continued”
hi!got ur msg.. interesting research work.. im seeing myself in you way back during my thesis days..Ü sure Id love to set an interview with you.. is this 4 schl work by the way?just holler me out in my email addy so we could set something up.. im doing the nightshift kse so im so unsure of my sked.. ciao!
another point about IM conversation vs oral is that it’s non confrontational. this may be a preferrable mean of communication for those that are non native english speakers also. plus, you on IM, you can always hit the ‘backspace’ key. haha.
anyways, i got your message and would be honored to do the interview. interesting thing is, your research is something ive been condunting mysel, though not directly .
i actually have skype. i only used it once to call my cellphone when i lost it. im not too sure how to use it, but i think it automatically turns on once my pc is on. my handle is ‘ibalik’.
Good point, there’s that too. Text does change the meaning of a message even if the explicit content remains the same. And yes, you can change your mind up to the point you press Enter.
Hope you got my email, laters.