It's a different kind of communication but I don't think there's a qualitative difference between them. They are just different, with their unique set of benefits and disadvantages. Online communication might be asynchronous for example (which allows more frequent communication) and better suited to share pieces of digital content like pictures/videos/links which might not be important for you but for younger people it is. They can still meet each other offline of course (it would suck to go to a digital concert or whatever, nobody does that) but there's a shared cultural context that is digital and online communication is what enables this. I think it's close-minded to dismiss that.Also developing a deep connection or whatever is rarely the "goal" of casual socializing (which is what online communication is for). But it also helps keeping your "real" friendships strong by enabling frequent and convenient communication even when life doesn't allow meeting frequently.
disambiguation|2 years ago
Again, it's better in person. Let's watch it together, not defer it hours, days, or ghost it entirely. Otherwise my text group is reduced to an algorithmic content feed. Optional, impersonal.
> but there's a shared cultural context that is digital and online communication is what enables this.
Culture exists in the real world and is imported online. Nothing about online is necessary to have a shared context.
> Also developing a deep connection or whatever is rarely the "goal" of casual socializing
Yeah, if all you're aiming for is casual, then social media is great. Just like fast food is great for a casual diet.
> But it also helps keeping your "real" friendships strong by enabling frequent and convenient communication even when life doesn't allow meeting frequently.
The point being that you do have to eventually meet again in person, as a relationship that moves entirely online is really no relationship at all.