The Handbook of Discourse Analysis

614 Susan C. Herring
1 Classification of CMD
1.1 Medium and channel
Computer networks are often considered a medium of communication distinct from
writing and speaking. Thus CMD researchers speak of electronic “medium effects”
on CMD, rather than treating CMD as a form of “writing” (typing) that happens to be
distributed by electronic means (see, e.g., Murray 1988). The justification for this is
that while the means of production of CMD is similar to that of other forms of typing,
including allowing for the editing and formatting of text in asynchronous modes,
other aspects of computer-mediated communication preclude easy classification with
either writing or speaking. CMD exchanges are typically faster than written exchanges
(e.g. of letters, or published essays which respond to one another), yet still significantly
slower than spoken exchanges, since even in so-called “real-time” modes,
typing is slower than speaking. Moreover, CMD allows multiple participants to communicate
simultaneously in ways that are difficult if not impossible to achieve in
other media, due to cognitive limits on participants’ ability to attend to more than
one exchange at a time (Herring 1999a). In addition, the dissemination of computermediated
messages involves distribution to an unseen (and often unknown) audience,
while at the same time creating an impression of direct and even “private”
exchanges (King 1996). For these and other reasons, participants typically experience
CMD as distinct from either writing or speaking, sometimes as a blend of the two,
but in any event subject to its own constraints and potentialities.
Media may differ in the number of channels, or sources of communication, they
comprise. Face-to-face communication is a “rich” medium, in that information is
available through multiple channels: visual, auditory, gestural, etc. In contrast, CMD
is a “lean” medium (Daft and Lengel 1984), in that information is available only
through the visual channel, and that information is limited to typed text. This has led
some to posit that the computer medium is “impoverished” and unsuitable for social
interaction (Baron 1984). However, there is ample evidence that users compensate
textually for missing auditory and gestural cues, and that CMD can be richly expressive.
This is perhaps nowhere better illustrated than by the popularity of “virtual
sex” (Deuel 1996; McRae 1996) – sex being an activity that normally requires more
channels of communication than face-to-face speech (e.g. touch) – in which acts of
physical intimacy are textually enacted.
1.2 Medium variables
While the case for the deterministic influence of the computer medium on language
use is often overstated, properties of computer messaging systems nonetheless play a
significant role in shaping CMD. One important distinction relates to synchronicity of
participation (Kiesler et al. 1984). Asynchronous CMD systems do not require that
users be logged on at the same time in order to send and receive message; rather,
messages are stored at the addressee’s site until they can be read. E(lectronic)-mail is