WATS GOOD ITS THE WEEKEND AND YOUR LOOKING 4 SUMTHING TO DO COME CHECKOUT THE HOTTEST R&B SINGER FROM ARKANSAS AND IF YOU LIKE WAT YOU HEAR ADD ME
“Lil Robb”
You know it when you see it. It used to be called “AOL speak” or “chat lingo” and now it’s recognized mostly from “the MySpace crowd” or as “IM talk”. Whatever it is and whatever your opinions of it, there’s an interesting trend repeating itself in the Web world. Back in the mid ’90s AOL was the largest ISP and brought the largest number of “newbies” online. Novice users who were not familiar with the technical aspects of the Web, possibly owing to the [low] average age, mangled and deformed all manner of speech and communication into this new dialect.
What I find most interesting is that those teenagers in 1996 are significantly older now, but have been replaced by teenagers today who frequent sites like MySpace and generate the same type of nonsensical communication. What happened to all of the teenagers from a decade ago? Did they grow up and learn to speak English? Did they leave the Web after they got bored? Are they still on the Web somewhere writing about inane blather in their uniquely lobotomized fashion? What about the new kids? What will happen to them?
I’m interested in these questions because their answers may indicate several aspects of the future of the Web. If these kids actually grow out of their stupor and become productive members of the Web community, that indicates a much different future from one where they leave the Web entirely, paving the way for a new generation to stage an unfortunate non-intellectual and grammatical revolution. Further, what effect will MySpace have as a vehicle for this demographic? Is MySpace effectively stunting the intellectual growth of teenagers everywhere, or is it simply serving as a medium of expression for a preexisting mountain of ignorance?
I’d be interested to see if anyone has collected data about who has stayed on the web since the mid ’90s and what they are doing today. Without any data I’m hesitant to hypothesize. I’d like to think that people grow out of their ignorance, but unfortunately it’s hard to overlook the fact that the majority of contemporary America is a rather large counterexample for that hope.
Anecdote: I resisted all usage of acronyms and emoticons up until about a year ago when I started using them as a joke.
Now I use them regularly online and often spell out acronyms like WTF when speaking. I can no longer tell if it’s a joke or not.
Are you familiar with Orwell’s Politics and the English Language ?
The problem of people having foolish thoughts due to ignorance or avoidance of clear speech is nothing new. The divide between the barely literate and the super-literate is nothing new.
Is the internet making people stupider? No. It’s actually encouraging people to read and write more than they otherwise might. It’s just not making them read or write particularly well.
p.s. your comment preview button doesn’t work (for me)
I haven’t read Orwell’s piece on this subject. I’ll check it out though.
I agree that the Web certainly brings more opportunities for reading and writing, though maybe low quality opportunities to most, in the form of IMs or MySpace comments. I guess it will always be the ones who deliberately seek out correctness and knowledge who will be successful in achieving it, whether on the Web or anywhere else.
P.S. The comment preview works for me and everyone else I’ve talked to. Which browser?
Jed is exactly right. Sturgeon’s law applies to people on the internet as it does elsewhere: 90% of their words are crap. It doesn’t mean they’re getting dumber, it means the barrier to entry in the world of digital print is getting lower and lower.
And of course, that kind of language is useful, as it pretty consistently signals that the user isn’t someone worth paying attention to, or that they’ve got some net-maturing to do.