Digital Communication, Misunderstanding and The Crisis of Understanding Among Us

From Interpersonal Communication Perspective

8/5/20253 min read

A few months ago, I received a Whatsapp message from one of my students. It read: "P.." followed by "Save my number, Sir.." in the next bubble. At the moment I was paused and stunned. Moments earlier, we had just spoken after class and exchanged contact details. But when the message appeared, I genuinely felt disconnected. My thoughts spiraled. I knew "P.." was a kind of digital "ping", a trend of informal greeting in chat culture. but what was the student really intention? Was it an attempt to build a relationship? or simply a techical follow-up? If it was meant to be a greeting, did they see it as polite? Or was I just being sensitive? Maybe the student didn't grasp the context of communication? that words are not just sounds, but carry emotional nuance and meaning. And yes, context matters! if that message were sent to a close friend, it might be acceptable. But what about from student to lecturer? Somehow, I couldn't take it as a gesture of respect. It was rude. Borderline Insolent!

This reflection brought me back to what Venter (2019) once pointed out: that Computer-Mediated-Communication (CMC) tends to lose essential non-verbal expressions such as gestures and tone. And yet, these are precisely what we need to understand others. Without them, our words become more susceptible to misinterpretation. Conversations that should strengthen connection instead breed assumptions and suspicion. A simple say "it's fine" in digital chat among young people can sound cold and dismissive. But with a slight touch of visual emoji "it's fine 😀.." the meaning feels far more reassuring. Somehow, zoom meeting feel more lively and focused when we keep cameras on. But once the faces dissapear, the atmosphere turns awkward, monotonous, even distracting.

It is this poverty of nonverbal cues that makes our digital communication increasingly shallow. Easily to misread, quickly judged. In fact, the rising divorce trends in Indonesia appear to reflect the same concern: we are slowly more losing our ability to truly understand one another. In 2023 alone, there were 408,347 recorded divorce cases. Over 250.000 (61,7%) of them were triggered by arguments and unresolved conflicts that leaving the financial issues, which stood at just over 108.000 cases (26,5%). Arifin (2023) said that persistant disagreement has been the major of divorce over the past five years. So, this is not a temporary, but a social phenomenon which is constantly becoming serious threat for our household integrity. Perhaps what breaks a home is not the lack of money, but the failure of words to build shared understanding.

To my best knowledge, effective communication rests on three core elements. Clear intent/Intentionality (Watzlawick, 1967), genuine presence in listening/presence (Rogers, 1961), and shared meaning-making/co-construction of meaning (Berger & Lucmann, 1966). What is the point of wanting to learn if one doesn't truly pay attention? What is the value of listening if it's only to respond or contradict? Even when both intention and presence are there, if share understanding is absence, communication still collapses. Imagine two people can engage in dialogue with good intentions and full attention, yet still fall into disagreement over a single word, say it "freedom". One believes freedom means absolute right to articulate one's mind; the other sees it as something that must be ethical and accountable. Eventually, no resolution, no understanding, only conflict, because meaning was never aligned.

Maybe that's why, deep down, I felt that student's message wasn't casual. It was rude.

Reference: