In 2013 one pope resigned, another was elected, Obama assumed his second term and Edward Snowden put the United States in check after leaking secret documents about the NSA.
A minor matter in the midst of so much noise was that WhatsApp introduced voice notes in its application.
In other words, the possibility of sending an audio file with a message in our own voice instead of a text to a person.
Ten years later, that trifle that only a few technology portals echoed has completely changed the way we communicate.
We have not been able to enjoy the silence again.
At that time the application already had 20 million users in Spain and 300 million worldwide (today there are more than 2,200 million).
But it was not until 2018 when voice messages became popular, when specialized websites such as
The Ringer
wondered if their era had begun.
It's not over yet.
Since then we have been inundated with voice messages (according to WhatsApp data, there were 7 billion a day in 2022) in which there is no time limit.
There is, in fact, a weight limit: 64 megabytes is, according to the company, the maximum a file can weigh, but pray that you never have to discover how many tens of minutes of voice can fit there.
Hint: audios of almost 20 minutes have been seen on Twitter.
Many said: the answering machines are back.
But not quite.
On the answering machine someone was leaving a concise, short, and usually important message.
And above all, they did not expect us to have to respond immediately.
Voice messages continually reach our devices uninvited, exhausting the world and representing the culture of hyperconnectivity in which we are immersed that prevents social, work and family obligations from ever ending.
We are locked in the eternal conversation.
The dictatorship of having to listen to WhatsApp audios and expect us to respond to them creates debate on the street, on Twitter and in the stands of this newspaper.
More and more chats look like this: exchanging audio messages throws a total of zero letters on the screen.SSS (Getty Images/iStockphoto)
From WhatsApp they seem aware of how they have complicated our existence and they are working again on an update that automatically transcribes messages for those who do not want to listen to them (after a first attempt in 2021 that was cancelled).
Apple, for its part, seems to want to make it even worse for us: they are working on a technology for iMessage that will transform written messages into messages with the recipient's voice.
Forget the pathological distaste for hearing your own voice from previous generations: today we do not stop recording ours in all kinds of devices.
The (in)human voice
What exactly is our problem with voice messages?
It is not listening to another human voice.
In fact, we seem to like that one: podcast
consumption
in Spain doubled in 2022. We listen to an average of 9.5 hours of other people's voices in this format every week.
The problem, according to all the experts, is the obligation it imposes: a voice message must be listened to in its entirety and listened to now.
“If you get bored with a podcast, you turn it off and that's it.
But if a friend sends you an audio, you feel obliged to somehow hold that conversation”, explains the psychologist Violeta Alcocer.
“And audio messages force the listener to attend to what is being said from beginning to end in order to fully understand the message.”
This would not be entirely problematic if we knew how to synthesize what we want to say, but it does not seem that we are willing to skimp on words.
“In an audio message we are going to use more redundant expressions, hesitations and branching comments on the main message.
The person who listens to it will be forced to remain attentive to a speech of variable length to be able to find out something as simple as, for example, that her father is going to make croquettes for dinner ”, continues the psychologist.
WhatsApp seemed to confirm just a year ago that we were sending very long messages when it incorporated, in March 2022, the possibility of reproducing messages at two speeds.
An element that
"A basic reason for our rejection of this type of message is our society of immediacy," confirms psychiatrist Luis Gutiérrez Rojas, author of
La belleza de vivir
, a guide to surviving in an increasingly fast-paced world.
“We want everything fast, we want everything done and we are increasingly impatient.
The big problem with voice messages, which people already reproduce directly at double speed, is that we need to know very quickly what they want to tell us.
If on top of that they last three, four or five minutes, the annoyance is cosmic”.
Other times, be careful, the bother is not being able to hear them.
"Sometimes we cannot hear a message if there are people around," says Fernando Sarrais, author of
El diálogo
, a guide on how to communicate better.
"This waiting to hear the message in private ends up being unpleasant, because we have become impatient."
A woman sends a voice message via her mobile phone.picture alliance (dpa/picture alliance via Getty I)
It is curious that in the end time is the one who dictates our relationship with this type of message.
Mark Zuckerberg's other two big platforms, Facebook and Instagram, nip the problem in the bud: for now, voice messages there are limited to one minute.
That is not entirely positive: it usually ends up causing more discomfort when we receive, instead of one very long voice message, four very short ones.
Do not call me
Having overcome the question of length, it is worth considering whether something that we can say briefly and concisely would not be worth writing.
"As in everything, common sense and education should be applied here," observes Gutiérrez Rojas.
“Before you send a voice message, think about whether you could write a short message.
be empathetic
They often tell me: 'I'm sending you an audio, I know you're busy'.
Hey, if you know I'm busy, don't send me an audio!
Many end with an 'excuse me for the ember I have given you'.
Don't apologize to me and don't do it!"
Important lesson: if there is no other choice but to send a voice message, it is polite to ask the interlocutor if it is okay to receive one and if he is in a situation where he can listen to it calmly.
Often the work is double for the sender:
Some will continue to think that there are things that are better to express with our voice and they are right.
Sarrais confirms that "written communication is cooler, it doesn't have the context of body language and intonation that can add nuance and express affection, so it's better for dealing with complex or sensitive issues that require nuance."
Alcocer agrees: “A familiar intonation and voice that somehow makes the person you are listening to much more present to you than if you only read their message.”
Of course, Gutiérrez Rojas warns that this human emotion plays in two directions: “Let's go to the other side: negative emotion.
Some people send audios to show how pissed off they are.
Let's not forget trials, for example for gender violence,
in which unpleasant messages have been shown in which the tone of voice already marks everything.
There is no such thing in text messages.
You can put capital letters and exclamations, but the strength of the voice and its richness is much greater, both for affection and for anger.
As a psychiatrist I cannot enumerate how many people regret things they have said and have left on record and, in the case of the audio with more force, because of the tonality.
Never send angry audios, beware of recriminations and saying anything driven by emotions.
That stays forever."
As a psychiatrist I cannot enumerate how many people regret things they have said and have left on record and, in the case of the audio with more force, because of the tonality.
Never send angry audios, beware of recriminations and saying anything driven by emotions.
That stays forever."
As a psychiatrist I cannot enumerate how many people regret things they have said and have left on record and, in the case of the audio with more force, because of the tonality.
Never send angry audios, beware of recriminations and saying anything driven by emotions.
That stays forever."
For now, waiting for what WhatsApp does with them, the voice message remains.
More and more popular songs include it, from Adele to Harry Styles to Fusa Nocta, a custom inherited from 90s
r&b
that included messages that artists received on their answering machine (
Pitchfork
published a comprehensive guide on the matter in 2017).
Dating and flirt applications are beginning to include voice messages in their chats.
Grindr was the first (as always) and today it is enjoyed on others like Happn, Bumble or Hinge.
The jump to the voice message was always perceived in these contexts as a step forward: after the written conversation, receiving a message where listening to the voice of a possible suitor invites you to think about wedding bells.
That has already made
voicefishing
popular , that is, people changing their accent, pitch, or gravity in their voices in an attempt to appear more desirable.
Today, when technology overwhelms us with voice messages that often could have been solved with a text that says “see you at five”, it is possible that the most desirable thing is to be short, direct and brief.
You can follow ICON on
,
,
, or subscribe here to the
Newsletter
.
