I was at a party, and a friend of mine met a girl. It was standard house-party stuff -- too hot and overcrowded, with bad snacks and warm beer. They chatted, laughed a bit, tried to talk over the loud music, had a few drinks. I dragged him out around 1 a.m. It was clear that they had totally clicked. As we were getting in to the cab, I asked him if he got her number. He said no, that he’d just track her down on Facebook.

The next day in a cloudy, post-party stupor, he creeped Facebook, found her, spent a solid 20 minutes writing and rewriting the wittiest message possible, pressed send and never heard from her again.

We live in complicated times. There are so many ways to communicate. From text messages to email to Facebook, the list just keeps growing. All these forms of communication are so new it’s hard to keep up with exactly what they each mean. The mode of communication can sometimes mean more than what we actually say, and can explain a lot about why someone might not reply. The idea that the medium is the message applies as much to flirting or friendship as it does to business and culture. The tools we use to communicate shape the nature of our communication as much, if not more, than the actual content.

Whether you’re asking someone out on a date or trying to get a business deal done, figuring out how to navigate this communications cobweb is key to sending the right message.

When we still lived in an analog world, we could craft a message as we saw fit, be it by choosing handwriting over typing, the subtle imprint of a kiss on a page or even a scented kerchief included with a note. The fact that you were writing a letter didn’t constrain the nature of the message.

But digital dialogue is sterile and uniform. One email to the next, no matter the context or intention, looks the same. It is shaped more by databases and designers who are trying to force our interactions into the little boxes of user interfaces and character counts. Each form of communication brings with it different constraints and contexts. With text messages, it’s character length and bad keyboards; with email, it's the corporate, formal appearance; and with Facebook, it’s chatty and impersonal.

The trend these days when you first meet someone and you want to follow up seems to be jumping right to Facebook without giving it a second thought. The idea of asking someone for someone’s number feels old-fashioned and unnecessary. This line of thinking is a big mistake. Facebook is convenient and easy; that’s both its strength and weakness.

When you send people a Facebook message, they view it alongside dozens of other notifications, messages, pokes and pics. It’s like talking to someone in a noisy restaurant. They are trying to pay attention but get distracted by all the action. Even before you get to the message part, Facebook is a weak way to communicate. The barrier to contacting someone through Facebook is low. All you need is a name; it requires little more than the most superficial of relationships, and this immediately puts your message in a certain context. You are now just like all the other guys taking the easy road.


The phone is totally different. First, it’s much more personal and spontaneous -- even if you’re just leaving a voicemail. But beyond the voice part of things, the context of a phone (or even a text message) is totally different than other means of communication.

To communicate with someone by phone requires a transaction that is loaded with meaning: the writing down of a 10-digit phone number. This code is the access key to direct communication. When you have someone’s phone number, it means that not only do you know that person well enough to have gotten the number, but you’ve made the effort of keeping track of it and using it. It’s way more complicated than searching a name on Facebook. It is this effort combined with familiarity that gives the number meaning.

Technologies that make it easier to communicate naturally create a gap between the outlay of effort and the return on that effort. In other words, technology makes things easier. That’s why we love it and get so excited about new iPhones -- they come with the promise of making social interactions easier.

The classic example of how technology makes things easier is the bicycle compared to walking. The same amount of effort results in exponentially more gain on a bicycle than it does on foot.

This dynamic, extends to digital technologies -- so much so that the computer is often referred to as the bicycle of the mind. Digital technologies multiply our mental efforts in the same way the bicycle multiples physical efforts.

Sometimes technology makes communication so effortless that it loses its meaning. This is OK when all we care about is efficiency, like when we order a book from Amazon or send our roommate a grocery list, but when it comes to building relationships that matter, it’s the thought coupled with the effort that counts.

Facebook is the lazy man’s tool, one that takes little effort and therefore has even less meaning. The next time you’re at a networking event or meet a girl, take the time to get their number. It may be less convenient than following up on Facebook, but you’ll make a bigger impact and probably get a better response.