Abstract
In Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age, Turkle further develops the argument put forth in her previous book Alone Together (2012). She asserts that the problem is that people are so fascinated with digital technology and so wired to their devices, especially mobile phones, that they wrongly equate connectivity with progress. Instead, she posits that being “always on” contributes to the death of conversation, which engenders a diminishing capacity for empathy in society. She contends that empathy is crucial because it allows emotional and intellectual intimacy with oneself and with others. Turkle then frames Reclaiming Conversation as a call to action—to get people to start speaking more to each other, thereby building a more empathetic world.
Turkle presents observations, interview data, and existing literature as evidence that digital devices are robbing us of our appreciation for solitude and our ability for reflection. These devices then shape relationships in our personal, professional, and school lives. For example, people prefer “safe” texting to “risky” face-to-face meetings, cannot understand others’ feelings, and learn inefficiently. With a curated online presence and the acceptance of zero privacy in a world dominated by social media, Turkle’s interviewees no longer possess nor desire the private mental space for critical thinking. Thus, reclaiming conversation is not only important for individuals on a microlevel, but also for democratic life at large.
The book is very accessible, and it is evident that Turkle is on a mission. However, it is unclear how Turkle arrives at her conclusions for there is no transparency about the methods used or the theoretical basis of her study. It can be inferred that interviews and participant observation were conducted, but no other details are provided. Her authority to discuss the subject and the rigor of her methods and analyses are assumed, rather than argued for.
It is also important to note that Turkle’s research participants were predominantly educated, middle-class individuals (e.g., college students and Silicon Valley workers). The interview data presented come across as anecdotal, one-sided, and expedient. This leads to questions of whether the conclusions are sweeping interpretations and causal inferences.
What she observes can be part of a larger phenomenon of individualization due to historical forces such as modernity and globalization, where macrostructure rather than pure individual choice shapes behavior (e.g., do we choose to retreat to our phones or does modern society isolate us, making communication to/through a machine appealing?). She also misses the meanings behind her interviewee’s experiences with digital devices, focusing principally on the devices’ instrumentality. Situating her assertions historically and considering other vantage points would enrich the book’s analyses and recommendations.
Furthermore, several behaviors that Turkle frames as problems existed even before the digital age. For example, she mentions the perils of a curated online life, even though our offline lives have never been “unedited” before social media, and people have always engaged in the labor of self-presentation. While the social trends she observes may seem adverse, and there is no denying that technology can exacerbate them, to frame these phenomena as consequences of digital devices is somewhat dubious.
Regardless of whether one agrees with Turkle, one of the greatest strengths of this book lies in the groundwork Turkle has undertaken. Her impassioned argument for conversation does hold some truth—conversation is indeed necessary for empathy and democracy. The material she has gathered does provide invaluable insights into how certain groups of people use digital technology and its possible outcomes. Insofar as the limitations to the analyses in this book are kept in mind, it is a useful resource for understanding our evolving relationship with digital technology.