Multitasking

Okay, so it doesn't at all surprise me that we are a nation that relies heavily on multitasking, to the point where there are studies and surveys done on it. As a "fast paced" nation, we all are probably guilty of doing something multitask-ical, but my question is... is that so bad?

So I realize that multitasking in a social situation may be bad, I mean, I wouldn't want someone to be having a "deep" AIM conversation with me while webchatting with their mom and making a sandwich. But on the same note, because AIM creates a digital barrier, will I really ever know? I would want to be someone to be full fledged engaged in a conversation, but if it's just a normal conversation, does the speaker really have to be completely engaged to the point where they are doing nothing else other than listening to you ramble? I mean it would be nice, but sometimes it's also nice for someone to rant to you on AIM and you read the whole story 5 minutes after they've finished exploding than sitting in front of the computer and watch them recount their story line by line. Or when people just talk normally, it seems like all the sentences are broken up. For example:

LOL

you were looking

for

what was it again

cupcakes?!

lol

See how it's not really a sentence, but instead 6 lines? So the conversation was taken completely out of context, but nevertheless, illustrates the short choppy language that we use nowadays. A technique used to engage the reader and make it feel more like "real time" because every half a second contains another line, in the end, the chatting time could be made more efficient with multitasking.

Sometimes I wonder, what is multitasking anyway? Does me listening to music while typing this blog count? Or how about when I have multiple conversations on AIM? I wouldn't really consider that intense multitasking, but technically, it does count.

What fascinated me too was the idea of gender differences in terms of language and general AIM talk. Doesn't surprise me. In the past, my English teacher told us that guys use way less words than an average female uses. It's still interesting to look at old AIM logs and notice the difference between conversations I have with males vs. females.

But on a different note, I think that AIM might actually help a lot of boys express their emotions. With the digital barrier and in the comfort of his own home, I feel like if I do have a deep conversation with a male, it would be easier to conduct on AIM instead of in person. Maybe it's because I don't see the awkward body language that I'm missing, but I'd like to defend guys by saying that I've actually had some deep, emotional conversations with them on AIM. So maybe our conversations are generally shorter on AIM, but that doesn't mean that guys are incapable of producing a well thought out conversation that could lead to self revelations.

Either way, I always prefer the face to face conversation. You can read expressions, know that the person is fully engaged and the ability for one to "hide behind the screen" is impossible. I find it ]annoying when you're having a nice conversation and the person just leaves without notice because the question is too difficult. Or if the person sits on the other side trying to find the PERFECT wording. Not to mention the ability to read tone in person, and the ability to misconstrue tone over AIM. Face to face is still the way to go! :)

Questions:

1. Are there times when it's easier to multitasking than not?

2. Does having multiple conversations on AIM count as multitasking?

3. Do you think that AIM degrades one's ability to converse?

4. Do you notice a difference in terms of your AIM conversations when you talk to a guy vs a girl?