How e-mail rots your brain

John Freeman, the author of The Tyranny of E-Mail on why “any email correspondence is always a few exchanges away from a fight”

by Brian Bethune on Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:02pm - 36 Comments

Q: You think we’re only at the beginning of the tyranny of e-mail, a sobering thought given the current deluge and the current misunderstandings.
A:
This sort of messageopolis is just beginning to build. The thing I’m trying to say is we’re all sort of engineers and builders in that process, and the thing that’s nice about e-mail is if you have lots of correspondents and you start to change your habits or your behaviour and your attitude towards it, it has a multiplying effect because every e-mail you don’t send means an e-mail someone else doesn’t receive.

Q: You make it sound almost like a 12-step program. The first step—don’t send an e-mail you don’t need to—is going to be the hardest. Anyone who drops out puts himself in the outer darkness, in the sense of some part of him will be worried that he’ll be forgotten.
A:
Yeah, isn’t that the thing? When you get on e-mail in the morning and you don’t have your usual hefty batch you think, “What happened? Has everybody forgotten about me?”

Q: Tell me about your coping strategies.
A:
One of the directions of the book, I hope, was to try to focus on what the purpose of communication was so that we could decide what the parameters we’d allow it within our lives. Communication isn’t just about sharing information for business and for the purpose of doing your day-to-day tasks at the office, it’s also about sharing something, and if you don’t have a life outside the office—which e-mail makes harder and harder—you won’t have anything to share.

Q: All this angst and worry over a communications tool that you argue—and this is your deepest worry—inexorably fragments our attention and strips us of the ability to think in more coherent ways. It robs us, you wrote.
A:
In so many novels, you read scenes—perhaps less so now but certainly in the 19th century—where people were alone with their thoughts. How would that be portrayed now? You couldn’t actually portray it because the character would probably have an iPod plugged into his ear, and he’d be checking his BlackBerry every eight minutes. If you saw it written down you’d think, “Jesus Christ, this person’s crazy!” But if you spend a lot of time in an office and you do use these devices, that’s what our thoughts are like.

Q: And in the end we’ll have nothing worth emailing about. Perhaps a random series of fragmented tweets?
A:
The progression of the technology is certainly telling! But the thing to me that’s slightly encouraging is there is drop-off. Not every grandmother around the country is tweeting, and they probably won’t, because I think people are beginning to realize that there are some thoughts which are actually not thoughts, and some thoughts just don’t need to be shared, and some observations can go unrecorded.

Bookmark and Share
  • http://www.myspace.com/warp2600 Pal

    The same has been said about online social networking: people spend so much time building and running their social network(s) on the internet that they cannot have time to have a real social life. Well, while that sounds true, I think that when you are not so young and at school anymore and your old friends change jobs and move so often and they start a family, you just do not have the same opportunities to actually meet your old friends and get new ones. That"s where email and social networking come to the rescue. Fortunately I do not have a – corporate – job that requires me to read and immediately reply 200 or so emails a day, BTW that can be vicious, but I run my own business where email is essential and I think if there comes a time when my inbox is flooded with 200 emails in each morning, I will be wise enough to expand my business and hire extra help. It is always your decision to play the game or not.

  • Maggie

    Whatever happened to the make-sense idea that nothing actually controls us at all? We in fact govern exactly where our ship is going. Don't like it? Don't do it. Some people run at neck-breaking speed to answer the telephone when it rings – for all the same reasons stated here. Others of us make a conscious choice to not be a slave to an apparatus – sometimes I answer, sometimes I don't. If it's really important they will call again. Point is… I control what I do, my apparati have nothing to do with it.

  • Susan

    Doesn't anyone find it ironic that I am reading this article, accessed through a link in an email sent to me by MacLean's?

  • Carolyn

    What I struggle with is that e-mails and overall computer time has replaced a good novel!

  • J campbell

    weak article.Emails are a great tool,think about it..Junk email is like junk food,if your dumb enough to eat it don't blame the cook.So eat or delete.

  • http://MySpace.com/ElectroPig1 ElectroPig™ Von FökkenGrüüven

    Now I hate SPAM as much as the next guy, but saying that email is a bad thing is like saying that government interference in every aspect of our lives is a good thing, or that taking guns away from responsible citizens is going to protect us from the criminals of society. You know…the ones who NEVER register their guns…the ones who actually DO shoot people?!?

    This is like saying that the existence of drugs caused the drug war. Fact is, MONEY and RACISM caused the drug war, and the more you look into it, the more proof of this you will find.

    Of course, most people will simply read the article and accept it as fact, not having enough common sense to separate propaganda from reality, and there will likely be some new legislation enacted to curb our use of email…maybe they’ll use declining profits of Canada Post as a reason. Fact is, if Canada Post was doing it’s job as well as they could have, there wouldn’t be a single private shipping company out there…UPS wouldn’t be here, FedEx wouldn’t be here, Purolator wouldn’t be here, et cetera.

    We need to stop being sidetracked by inanities and start concentrating on what affects our lives directly…things like Bill C-6 making natural supplment posession a criminal offense, and Bill C-15 which is about to create the same mandatory minimum prison sentences in Canada that has failed so miserably in the USA.

  • http://myspace.com/ElectroPig ElectroPig

    I wouldn't have even the slightest problem with the idea fo creating a $1.00 fee for UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL EMAIL, since that would dry up the SPAM that most people get overnight, while concurrently dropping bandwidth requirements globally.

    I do not, however, believe that adding yet another tax–and let's face it, that's EXACTLY what this would end up being–on personal or LEGITIMATE business emails would do a damned bit of good for society, although it would generate billions of dollars in unearned revenue for the world's governments…something that they are surely already trying to find ways to justify. (Like what they do to us every day isn't bad enough!)

  • http://gapingwhole.wordpress.com/ Em.

    It would have been good to see some of the other side of things in the interview. Like, what about my ability to keep in touch with people who, before e-mail and facebook I would loose contact with? I also think there may be a certain benefit with e-mail forcing us to communicate in a new way.

    • hosertohoosier

      Even that aspect of it is troublesome. Seriously. By increasing the ease of keeping in touch with people you increase the number of people you are expected to keep in touch with, and the number of correspondences required. You may not mind this, but I do. I think cellular telephones have a similar effect – my students can't take two steps outside without checking their messages. Did somebody text me? Yet all they talk about to each other is irrelevant fluff. "Hey I'm on the bus now. Goin' home…" Cellular phones and email are the new smoking.

      I yearn for the olden days when it took a week to send a message. You would spend the time to make sure you message was accurate and substantive. Increasing the frequency of communication has decreased both its value and its quality.

  • Brian

    Several foolish comments in the comments… yes, there are many people in many professions receiving 200 messages or more in a day, and *none* of them are spam. In my previous career in which the whole office had a blackberry, people were doing nothing but sending messages back and forth, often even if they were in the same room for the same meeting. I'd put the damn thing down during a meeting to listen carefully to the discussion, and an hour later you'd have people writing three or four times wondering if you were dead because you hadn't replied to something sent 45 minutes before.

    And he's right about tone; people need to learn to pick up a phone or visit to talk something out as an alternative if things get heated, which happens way too easily because e-mail allows you to say things without feeling the immediate consequences up close. I've seen people have furious arguments over e-mail despite the fact that they're two cubicles away from each other.

    No question, e-mail has its benefits, but people need to understand its limitations, too.

  • ron h

    most people email because they can; not because they must. If something is truly important email is not the way to go. There is no proof of reception or having read. Check your email once every week or ten days…..guaranteed the number of messages will dwindle to a few….giving you more real time for what is important to you rather than your cyber family.

From Macleans