Friday, November 2, 2012

Week 11 D1 CMC vs F2f



CMC differs from F2F communication in many ways. The most obvious is CMC isn’t in person with someone. F2F deals with vocal tones, body positions, hand gestures, and is in person. CMC deals with text, nonverbal emoticons, and graphics. You communicate with someone f2f through in person communication or in groups. With CMC you do it through emails, blogs, bulletins, instant messages. Our online class utilizes CMC as opposed to a traditional classroom class where it is f2f. CMC makes it convenient for a lot of people. As the book mentions CMC moves communication a step beyond time and space.  CMC makes it easier for people to stay in touch with others and to get work done. However there are some downfalls to CMC. For instants, you can’t see the other persons facial expressions or body gestures towards a topic. Or sometimes meanings of thing are lost in translation between writing them and just speaking them. F2f is more formal and it seems to be easier to do when discussion major issues. CMC and f2f are both very useful and most people deal with both communication ways on a daily basis. 

3 comments:

  1. Thank you for sharing, I loved how you jumped right into that material and established on CMC communication differs from face-to-face communication. I agree with that information that you mentioned in your blog, and can defiantly tell that you understood what the text presented. There are many differences in CMC compared to F2F, however both are found to be useful and has negative and positives. I feel for a person to be an effect communicator they need to be able to use CMC as well as F2F communication. You did a great job listing the differences, and explain how they differ. Thank you again for sharing, and keep up the great work

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Roro, I liked your response to this discussion question. It had to do with CMC and F2F communication. You talked about how when people are communicating F2F there are many more factors that they have to be conscious of that wouldn’t apply with CMC communication. With F2F communication there are vocal tones, body language, facial features, hand gestures, posture and eye contact that play a factor. If I am communicating with someone F2F I expect to see them showing me with their body language that they are attentive to what I am saying. I think you did a great job because you touched on these aspects.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree that meanings can get lost through CMC because it is less formal than f2f. One thing the book didn’t talk about was the grammar in which CMC is used. Is it casual, with abbreviations and no capitalization that is usually used with instant messaging or is it formal with correct grammar and capitalization? With f2f, groups members immediately recognize “how to talk” with the group. It may be formal in the beginning when everyone is getting to know each other, but as time goes on it will become more casual. With CMC, it depends on the group and what they are working on to find what kind of language to use.

    ReplyDelete