Editing Online and offline (section)

==Generalisations==
Online and offline distinctions have been generalised from computing and telecommunication into the field of human interpersonal relationships. The distinction between what is considered online and what is considered offline has become a subject of study in the field of [[sociology]].<ref name=Slater>{{cite book|chapter=Social Relationships and Identity On-line and Off-line|title=Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Consequences of ICTs|editor1=Leah |editor2=Sonia |editor3=Lievrouw |editor4=Livingstone|author=Don Slater|pages=533&ndash;543|year=2002|publisher=Sage Publications Inc|isbn=0-7619-6510-6}}</ref>

The distinction between online and offline is conventionally seen as the distinction between [[computer-mediated communication]] and [[Face-to-face (philosophy)|face-to-face]] communication (e.g., [[face time]]), respectively. Online is virtuality or [[cyberspace]], and offline is reality (i.e., [[Real life (reality)|real life or "meatspace"]]). Slater states that this distinction is "obviously far too simple".<ref name=Slater /> To support his argument that the distinctions in relationships are more complex than a simple dichotomy of online versus offline, he observes that some people draw no distinction between an online relationship, such as indulging in [[cybersex]], and an offline relationship, such as being [[pen pal]]s.  He argues that even the [[telephone]] can be regarded as an online experience in some circumstances, and that the blurring of the distinctions between the uses of various technologies (such as [[personal digital assistant|PDA]] versus mobile phone, [[internet television]] versus internet, and telephone versus [[Voice over Internet Protocol]]) has made it "impossible to use the term ''online'' meaningfully in the sense that was employed by the first generation of Internet research".<ref name=Slater />

Slater asserts that there are legal and regulatory pressures to reduce the distinction between online and offline, with a "general tendency to assimilate online to offline and erase the distinction," stressing, however, that this does not mean that online relationships are being reduced to ''pre-existing'' offline relationships. He conjectures that greater legal status may be assigned to online relationships (pointing out that contractual relationships, such as business transactions, online are already seen as just as "real" as their offline counterparts), although he states it to be hard to imagine courts awarding palimony to people who have had a purely online sexual relationship. He also conjectures that an online/offline distinction may be seen by people as "rather quaint and not quite comprehensible" within 10 years.<ref name=Slater />

This distinction between ''online'' and ''offline'' is sometimes inverted, with online concepts being used to define and to explain offline activities, rather than (as per the conventions of the [[desktop metaphor]] with its desktops, trash cans, folders, and so forth) the other way around. Several cartoons appearing in ''[[The New Yorker]]'' have satirized this. One includes [[Saint Peter]] asking for a username and a password before admitting a man into Heaven. Another illustrates "the offline store" where "All items are actual size!", shoppers may "Take it home as soon as you pay for it!", and "Merchandise may be handled prior to purchase!"<ref>{{cite book|chapter=Introduction|title=Evolve: Succeeding in the digital culture of tomorrow|author=Rosabeth Moss Kanter|year=2001|publisher=Harvard Business School|isbn=1-57851-439-8|url=https://archive.org/details/evolvesucceeding00kant}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://executiveeducation.wharton.upenn.edu/ebuzz/0508/images/cartoon2.jpg |title=The "off-line store" cartoon from ''The New Yorker'' |access-date=6 September 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160410015927/http://executiveeducation.wharton.upenn.edu/ebuzz/0508/images/cartoon2.jpg |archive-date=10 April 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref>