The claim that is being made is that Email takes away from the social interaction that is found in vocal communication i.e. phone or in person. She is saying that it becomes easier to send messages and thoughts, harder though, to send emotions. Furthermore, that you lose ties with people because you can say whatever you want in an email and they can take it however they choose.
             I believe that the statements she has made consist of an inference. She doesn't know everyone and their view on emails and internet conversations. She can't possibly speak for everyone and answer how the world over feels on email and its lack of personal ness. She is generalizing with her own opinions to come up with a view towards email.
             The claim she is making seems to be pushing towards not using emails for conversations that can be taken wrong. Also, that email can be very impersonal and you might type it one way and your receiver understands it another. Seems to me, that she believes live talking is better than reading someone's thoughts.
             I think that there was some disagreement as well as agreement on my part at the start. It is a very expedient way of sending your thoughts and how-doya-doo's to people. However, you can't always look at an email and tell whether they are serious, or truly sad. Your average person can most of the time tell is someone is yanking their chain. Although, in emails besides the little smiley faces, you can't express emotion to the reader.
             You could send something to the effect of:
             I hate school it is so hard I'm going to go home and hang myself.
             How can someone just through typed text tell whether your coarsely joking or serious.
             That is where the downfall of email is, getting your emotions and feelings across. The upside that she seemed to not think about is that it is quite useful. You can send messages to people far away from you for no extra cost. There is no lo...