How will we talk in the future? What will we talk and discuss? To what extent have technology and artificial intelligence intervened to modify the topics of our exchange with others? There is a growing concern in electoral times: Can manipulation with advanced technologies change the course of opinions and emotions?
In the last parliamentary elections he won Freedom advancesHe stated, once again, that ballot boxes failed in their mission to measure the will of the people at the time of voting. However, where the trend that gave the winners to the Miley nominees was recorded in the virtual field, Where the “digital conversation” takes place.. This is no coincidence, as it is an area that liberals know well. It’s a space they’ve conquered and shaped during the pandemic, at the same time as many have been learning to make sourdough and doing gymnastics in the bathroom.
One possible definition – which combines different notes on the concept, as if it were an imitation of what artificial intelligence does – asserts that digital conversation is…Exchange landsAnd the dialogues and forms of interaction that occur in Social networks, messaging platforms, forums, comments, live broadcasts, online communities, video games, newslettersIt is not just “online speaking,” it is a specific style of conversation characterized by new logics, temporal uses, and cultural rules that are constantly changing or adapting. The challenge, of course, is how to measure and qualify what is happening in this dimension.
There was a consulting company that studies what is discussed on networks, forums, chats, etc., as it is a fertile field for opinions. It’s about to Custom communications. Among other conclusions, the analysts of this group understood that “the president is in his best moment (in 2025): he recovered digitally after 8 months thanks to two rescue operations: the United States and the elections.” “The recovery agenda was key to revitalizing our communities.” On the opposition side they found: “Peronism without a leader in the networks: the opposition voice is more active in criticizing Miley than defending its leaders. The Peronists’ defeat is not just electoral: in the provinces of greater electoral importance, Libertarian candidates were mentioned more often than Peronists.
The digital conversation is created not only by active participants, but is legitimized when an argument is won and can be potentially contagious to others with a political position, for example. What this virtual choice brings about is that it becomes infinite, continuous, neither beginning nor ending: it reactivates, mutates, and branches. There is always someone speaking in some potential channel or virtual space. And no one person in particular controls the scene, it’s not possible: thousands and millions of people have access to some space to intervene, produce content, comment or respond. Also to attack until the other is destroyed. Another feature is that it can include memes, emojis, gifs, audio recordings, mini videos, streams, stickers, and filters.
There are those who believe that digital conversation is a spontaneous place where freedom of expression can be exercised without any limits. But they do not know, or do not want to admit, that this conversation is mediated by algorithms, and the spaces are not neutral and have been designed by platforms with a logic of interest and segmentation. where? On Twitter/X, TikTok, WhatsApp, Instagram, Twitch, Reddit, etc., with a different logic of space.
Everything moves so fast that only speed, brevity and emotion matter. It’s not always discussions between humans, there are bots, AI assistants, automated responses and algorithms.
But it is not only in close friendships that face-to-face dialogue and personal meetings are encouraged, even with mobile phones silenced or turned off to distinguish the value of the word being expressed. There are also oddities. In meetings and cocktail parties where there are people with different levels of decision-making authority, communication is not always easy. Then appear “conversation facilitators,” people who have the social function of mediating and creating topics to generate conversation. And for everyone to participate and know who the person sitting next to is.
Sherry Turkle, a sociologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technologydefends face-to-face conversation as the most humane and humane act, essential for empathy and true connection, arguing that reliance on technology and mobile devices leads us to a sense of connected loneliness, where We prioritize digital connection over full presence and poor intimate dialogueLoss of basic skills such as listening and deep thinking.
Conversation as human development: it is where we learn to listen, empathize and understand others, a process that makes us “more human”. “Connected, but alone”: The paradox of our time, where technological saturation distances us from deep, authentic relationships.
In defense of the “non-producers” Turkle suggests reclaiming time for contemplation, reflection, and conversation without the immediate goal of productivity, which the digital world devalues. She suggests creating sacred spaces for conversation: device-free moments and spaces. Talk to those who don’t think alike: Leave your digital bubbles to understand other perspectives Focus on the person in front of us, not on the screen.
In his book In defense of the hadith Sherry Turkle has stated that she is not against technology, but rather for rRestoring the quality of our human interactions Against digital superficiality.
Meanwhile, in the turbulent realm of digital conversation, the battle is always on. It doesn’t matter when, In each corner there is a light on where the “conversation” is taking place. Without seeing each other’s faces.