icon-email icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-print icon-rss icon-search icon-stumbleupon icon-twitter icon-arrow-right icon-email icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-print icon-rss icon-search icon-stumbleupon icon-twitter icon-arrow-right icon-user Skip to content
Senior Correspondent

With all the newly hatched methods of interpersonal communication, the best system may still be face-to-face conversations. What is called “social media” – Facebook, where both parties punch texts into their own gadgets, and Twitter, where a snappy reply pretends to take the place of well-thought-out discourse – doesn’t measure up to a good face-to-face conversation. Donald Trump would be better off today had he cancelled his Twitter account months ago. While he has used that device in an attempt to extricate himself from a number of serious holes, he has only succeeded in deepening the grave.
The other day, I had a 45-minute argument in which only one of the parties lost control and ended up flinging his arms around, pointing his fingers and producing more decibels than solid points. I hate to admit it, but this irrational antagonist was yours truly! While I raved on, my opponent never raised his voice but was calm for the duration of the dispute. While my blood pressure escalated to near-stroke level, my adversary’s demeanor never wavered. 

Have I told you that I was arguing with a machine? Or maybe it was with a series of machines? I had called the online service of a well-known retail firm hoping to ask a question about a small order. The machine that answered the phone directed me to select a number from one to eight by which I would be directed to someone who would respond to my inquiry.
I pushed “5,” believing this number came the closest to what I was seeking. Did I get a person? No sir! What I got was another machine that laid another multiple-choice option on me. 

This process went on through four more generations of non-answers, until I was finally asked if I wanted to be switched to personal representative. Was I really about to talk to a human? No such luck. Somebody had once told me that the way to get out of this trap was to push “0” multiple times, and a flesh-and-blood human would suddenly materialize. So I did, and I got the same mechanical idiot with a pleasant voice informing me that I had arrived back at the main menu.

Completely out of sorts, I hung up the phone and made my way to the nearest retail outlet –an option I should have taken from the beginning—or so I concluded. This shop did not have the brand and model I was looking for in stock and directed me to contact their online service. Do you need me to tell you what happened when I tried that approach?
Some time ago, I was attending an international conference in Brazil in which most of the delegates were from Latin America. At that time, I didn’t know a word of Spanish, let alone Portuguese – now I know about 10 in the in one language and still none in the other. The presentations were all in Spanish, but I was able to pick up what was taking place because I had arrived with a bilingual friend who acted as my interpreter. Later that evening, over refreshments, I found myself seated by a delegate to the meeting who didn’t speak a word of English. We communicated for an hour, and I can tell you the details of the entire conversation. However, had we been reduced to texting each other in our own languages, neither of us would have understood a thing.
I admit to being a lover of gadgets. I have a computer, a smart phone, a tablet and a Kindle, but am barely literate on how to use any of them. I know a number of people whose diet is gluten free, and a couple of wise friends who are totally electronic-gadget free. When we meet, we engage in marvelous conversations. That is probably the way interpersonal discourse is meant to be.

Stay Up to Date

Sign up for articles by Charles Bayer and other Senior Correspondents.

Latest Stories

Choosing Senior Living
Love Old Journalists

Our Mission

To amplify the voices of older adults for the good of society

Learn More