I really enjoyed Applen’s piece for this week. This felt like an expansion on our class discussions. Reading pieces that cause me to expand on everyday tools are always enjoyable. Applen talks a lot about oral versus written communication. As a Communications major, this was intriguing to me as well. There is one main aspect I want to focus on specifically.
At the bottom of page four Applen talks about a major difference between written and oral communication. He states that written words have “no power to protect themselves.” In contrast, he talks about how oral communication allows for ideas to be challenged and clarified.
This was something I brought up in our class discussions. I believe that the main difference between written and oral words is the fact that written words are often just that.
What do I mean by that?
For example, you are reading an older book you picked up from the bookstore. On page 46 of the book, the author presents an idea you strongly disagree with. Now what? You are most likely not going to be able to respond to the author with a counter-argument. There is no communication between the two of you.
On the other hand, say that same author presents that idea to you in conversation. As the receiver, you now have a fighting chance to potentially persuade the author. There is now a channel of communication. Applen states that the “written word lives on forever”, and I completely agree with that statement.
Shortly after he says that spoken words are “dead”. Prior to reading this, I would have disagreed. This piece changed my mind on that.
All in all, this piece provoked a lot of thoughts on technologies and different types of communication. I believe I may have digested it differently due to my area of study.
Leave a Reply