This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.
Media

Differences between Face to Face and Social Media Communications.

This essay is written by:

Louis PHD Verified writer

Finished papers: 5822

4.75

Proficient in:

Psychology, English, Economics, Sociology, Management, and Nursing

You can get writing help to write an essay on these topics
100% plagiarism-free

Hire This Writer

Differences between Face to Face and Social Media Communications.

Abstract

Communication is a very important aspect of human relations. It comes in different forms, face to face interactions, and social media communication. Face to face communication requires participants’ physical presence while social media communication utilizes online channels like Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, and many more to facilitate interactions. Online communication has become the most popular form of interaction especially during the coronavirus pandemic that has restricted human movement in almost all of the countries around the globe. It has a gaping distinction from the traditional eye to eye interconnections with the complete removal of the physicality attribute. Moreover, the two forms of communication also differ in terms of internet connectivity, usage of body language, and geographical coverage. The essay consequently discusses these dissimilarities between the two.

The differences between face to face and social media communication

Social media communication requires good internet connectivity while face to face communication only requires participants’ physical presence. Should there be challenges with internet connectivity or availability, then meaningful communication is inhibited. Additionally, online communication requires both parties to be online at the same time. Where one party is offline, then there will be a delay in communication. On the other hand, face to face interlinkage allows attendants to engage in brainstorming and constructive arguments that lead to logical conclusions (Mallen, 2003). The likelihood of ending a meeting in real-time with logical finding is, therefore, more possible with face to face communication as compared to social media.

The use of body language is prevalent in the face to face communication as compared to social media. By observing the reaction of the audience, it’s easy for the sender to understand their concerns and how they feel. Furthermore, voice intonation, gestures used and facial expression gives a deeper understanding of the message being relayed The same can hardly be said for most social media platforms where it’s not easy to gauge the recipient’s sentiments through visual limitation. Only specific apps such as Zoom, Instagram, and WhatsApp give the allowance of audio-visual communication which may sometimes be unclear (Okdie, 2011). In one on one communication, the person communicating can display their own emotions and reactions making it easier for the recipients to appreciate the information.  An example is where a supervisor in a physical meeting can push his subordinates for better performance and still show that he cares. The engagement of body language in physical communication, therefore, lessens the room for misunderstanding and misinterpretation.

Social media communication provides a wider geographical coverage whilst face to communication is limited to the people present. The information posted on social media can be viewed by millions of people worldwide within a short time. Applications like Zoom, for example, have been useful in facilitating global meetings during the Covid19 pandemic where a third of the globe is in lockdown (Tashanova, 2020). People from various countries can therefore easily interact and still maintain social distancing measures. The current situation has consequently highlighted the effectiveness of social media in reaching a global audience.

Conclusion

Online communication differs from face to communication in that it entails limited use of body language, requires good internet connectivity, and facilitates intercontinental communication. In conclusion, both forms of interaction are important in facilitating interactions, though their relevance lies in the variances like distance, cost, and participants’ availability.

 

 

References

Mallen, M. J., Day, S. X., & Green, M. A. (2003). Online versus face-to-face conversation: An examination of relational and discourse variables. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training40(1-2), 155.

Okdie, B. M., Guadagno, R. E., Bernieri, F. J., Geers, A. L., & Mclarney-Vesotski, A. R. (2011). Getting to know you: Face-to-face versus online interactions. Computers in human behavior27(1), 153-159.

Tashanova, D., Sekerbay, A., Chen, D., Luo, Y., Zhao, S., & Zhang, T. (2020). Investment Opportunities and Strategies in an Era of Coronavirus Pandemic. Available at SSRN 3567445.

  Remember! This is just a sample.

Save time and get your custom paper from our expert writers

 Get started in just 3 minutes
 Sit back relax and leave the writing to us
 Sources and citations are provided
 100% Plagiarism free
error: Content is protected !!
×
Hi, my name is Jenn 👋

In case you can’t find a sample example, our professional writers are ready to help you with writing your own paper. All you need to do is fill out a short form and submit an order

Check Out the Form
Need Help?
Dont be shy to ask