Was "Dear Abby" my friend?

In early 2013, longtime newspaper columnist Pauline Phillips died at the age of 94. For traditional newspaper audiences, Phillips was known to the world as “Abigail Van Buren”—a renowned advice columnist who authored the world’s most widely syndicated newspaper column, reaching over 1,400 newspapers and an estimated 110 million people each time it was published. From her first column—appearing in the San Francisco Chronicle in 1956—Phillips’ columns were popular because of the pithy advice she gave readers. Readers were invited to write her letters describing their struggles in relative detail, and Phillips would select a few, publishing the complete letter text and a pseudo-name for the letter writer (“Troubled in Tacoma” or “Desperately Depressed”) along with her advice.

From a communication perspective, we might consider what compelled so many anonymous strangers to write Abby about their lives. Most readers knew that Abby was not a real person—the pen name Abigail van Buren—and they were also aware that if Phillips did respond to their letters, she would publish the entire letter text in thousands of daily newspapers around the world. Common themes of these letters included stories about adultery, drug and substance abuse, and other social taboos that most people would consider highly private information, yet they shared openly with Phillips and, as a proxy, with the world . . . and she would respond with a similar level of detail and personability.

So, is this an example of interpersonal communication—a letter to a friend and a response back—or is this an example of mass communication—a letter to a newspaper to be shared with the world?

The "Dear Abby" situation is an interesting form of communication, as one writes a seemingly personal letter for a close friend, however, the response is shared with the world, rather than just the initial sender. At a glance, one may assume that this is an example of interpersonal communication, since the contents of the letter are personal and the sender expects a response answering these questions and concerns. Yet, the content of conversation does not determine the type of communication, for this one must look to the audience. In the "Dear Abby" case, the audience is the entire world. She replies to these letters and publishes her answers in newspapers, in which any one has access to. Newspapers are a form of mass communication. Therefore, although 'Dear Abby' responded to personal questions in a friendly manner, she was speaking to a massive audience of strangers across the globe. The articles written by Pauline Phillips were an example of mass communication.

Anonymity is a powerful aspect to communication. Not only powerful, but possibly greatly beneficial, as well as negative. On a positive end, it allows individuals to ask questions without embarrassment,  receive advice safely without harm to their reputation, and vent emotional difficulties without worry. However, it also allows for individuals to post information that would promote hate, anger, and discrimination without fault or consequence. In regards to My dear abby however, I think a large proportion of individuals that sent letters to "Abby" was due to the feeling of being anonymous. Knowing they could completely reveal personal information, or vent, so to speak, not just to Abby, but to the world, allowed individuals to write without hesitation. In the 1950's, while news could not travel at the click of a button, within smaller communities, rumors could easily ruin a person's reputation. Causing secrets to be held. However, an individuals deepest secrets could be removed from their chests, metaphorically speaking, and allow them to have the relief of knowing others know about their issue.

In one way, it is very similar to the anonymous media that we have today. Even through facebook, twitter, or other social medias, individuals do not have reveal who they truly are. Giving them access to the world to reach out, without the worry of any consequence falling back on them for being open and honest.

]I think that the Dear Abby column falls into a sort of weird formatting situation, which is what creates the question. So, above the surface, it seems to be interpersonal correspondence. These people are addressing “Abby” directly about issues that potentially dove deep into their personal lives. However, beneath the surface it is definitely mass communication.

Her readers are sharing their stories with the world and could be potentially trying to find similar stories with people that can relate. Through this medium, strangers can read about people going through the same things that they are and possibly find different ways to cope or get new ideas on how to deal with a particular situation.

Another thought is Dear Abby allowed people can ask the questions they may be otherwise too embarrassed or too scared to ask in public. This, similar to WebMD, allowed people to seek out information in privacy. But because the medium was so public, it is masscommunication formatted like interpersonal communication.