4 ms·

The way I used to look at it the 'Like' button was intended as a signal of affirmation to a person than to their comment. That is certainly the way my FB "Frien

by plorg 11y ago

The way I used to look at it the 'Like' button was intended as a signal of affirmation to a person than to their comment. That is certainly the way my FB "Friends" use it. Often other people don't have a perfectly distilled reaction to something, and the button functions more to say "this affected me" than, say, "I like your perspective on the President's policy in the Middle East." The semantics of a button labeled "Like" are certainly a little bit weird. I obviously don't like the fact that a friend is diagnosed with cancer. But my friends also don't post "I've got cancer." and leave it at that. People tend to explain their feelings if they share things like that. In any case, I'm not sure that Reactions are really much of an improvement. If my friend says, "I've got cancer, but my doctor says I can beat it. Thank you for all your support." I think I'd find this new feature confusing. Is it a "Like" because she has a positive outlook? Is it a "Sad" because cancer is difficult and stressful? Is it a "Wow" because it's unexpected? Or is it even an "Angry" because my deity of choice has shown itself to be capricious or vengeful? Maybe there's a positive side to this. Maybe it will, unwittingly, encourage people to attempt to share their feelings and try to process them instead of just clicking a button.

matmann2001 11y ago
Here's something to consider. What if the prior lack of buttons other than 'Like' subconsciously conditioned us to create posts that are 'like'-able? With a slightly wider spectrum of instantaneous reactions, perhaps the content, tone, and nature of our posts will broaden as well.
- plorg 11y ago
  Oh, I'm sure it did in some way. And I'm sure the Reactions will change the way that we create posts in the future. I'm not sure, though, if it will change in the way you suggest. I suppose I would be interested if certain subjects would be shared more, and it's possible that the tone of posts would change. For myself, though, I have a hard time imagining a post that I would make knowing potential reactions included a 'like' that I wouldn't make if, say, a 'sad' or 'angry' option were also available. I guess I'd be even less likely (than completely unlikely?) to post anything vaguely political. But other people post differently, I guess. To be honest, until I see how others use them most of the new options seem so blunt (or maybe so cute?) as to be almost embarrassing to use. Maybe 'perplexed' or 'impressed' would be good options?

by plorg 11y ago

matmann2001 11y ago

Here's something to consider. What if the prior lack of buttons other than 'Like' subconsciously conditioned us to create posts that are 'like'-able? With a slightly wider spectrum of instantaneous reactions, perhaps the content, tone, and nature of our posts will broaden as well.

plorg 11y ago
Oh, I'm sure it did in some way. And I'm sure the Reactions will change the way that we create posts in the future. I'm not sure, though, if it will change in the way you suggest. I suppose I would be interested if certain subjects would be shared more, and it's possible that the tone of posts would change. For myself, though, I have a hard time imagining a post that I would make knowing potential reactions included a 'like' that I wouldn't make if, say, a 'sad' or 'angry' option were also available. I guess I'd be even less likely (than completely unlikely?) to post anything vaguely political. But other people post differently, I guess. To be honest, until I see how others use them most of the new options seem so blunt (or maybe so cute?) as to be almost embarrassing to use. Maybe 'perplexed' or 'impressed' would be good options?