This is harsh. I think it's too harsh. Facebook is in many ways an organically occurring reaction of people.. people doing things the internet enables. Faceboo

This is harsh. I think it's too harsh. Facebook is in many ways an organically occurring reaction of people.. people doing things the internet enables. Facebook is as led as they are led by their users which is everyone. I agree that there are some negative consequences of online behavior. COnversing online can get nasty easily, with people feeling little slights and reacting until the whole thing collapses into far worse than normal human interaction. On the other hand it allows us to converse with a much wider group. Would we be talking in Person Mr. Stokes, about Facebook? Facebook didn't choose features for addictiveness, they chose and promoted features because people used them. We're attracted to a lot of things that aren't good for us. People read celebrity magazines, and feel bad. They wallow in jealousy and other negative emotions. They do this on Facebook because they're on facebook. There's a sense which this reasoning excuses everything. Tobacco companies gave people what they wanted too. But this is way more mixed. People follow the objects of their envy, a bastard sister of admiration. It's hard to lay that on Zuck. I'm going to completely bastardize a Douglas Adams Quote I can't find because I don't remember what words he used: