3 ms·

>when Facebook was first invented, who are now all having kids, I don't really see that phenomenon at play. I don't doubt that there are people that genuinely

by jasode 9y ago

>when Facebook was first invented, who are now all having kids, I don't really see that phenomenon at play. I don't doubt that there are people that genuinely enjoy others' baby photos. However, I wouldn't be able to tell which comments left on each others' pages were expressions of authentic sincerity instead of mindless reflexes of etiquette. That said, this Reddit thread[1] highlights a collective exasperation that clearly comes from somewhere. Likewise, there are surely some who enjoy others vacation slideshows (e.g. Retric in this thread) but again, there's a widespread rejection of them[2] that comes from somewhere. People won't complaint directly to the posters face -- e.g. they won't write on the posters wall to "stop flooding the feed with your stupid vacation photos". People are generally too polite to do that. >, maybe you're the narcissistic one. It's not about me. It's about observing social dynamics: 1) People overestimate the parts of their personal lives that are interesting to others 2) People are silent or insincerely praise the over-sharing of others' personal highlights Those 2 factors create a weird/interesting feedback cycle that transcends Facebook/Instagram/Snapchat. It's been happening long before that. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/rtapw/my_facebook_news_feed_now_that_all_my_friends_are/ https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/rtapw/my_facebook_ne... [2] http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2017/06/29/no-one-wants-to-see-your-boring-vacation-photos-study-says.html http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2017/06/29/no-one-wants-to-see...

rayiner 9y ago
Without knowledge of the minds of others, I can only assume they understand how Facebook works. For my part, if I consistently like pictures of your kid it means I want to see them on my feed. Clearly there are people who don't like pictures of peoples' vacations or kids enough to bitch on Reddit about it. I'd call those people narcissists. Facebook is inherently about sharing things about yourself: your kid, your vacation, your new job, your walk by the river, even your political opinions. Almost nothing posted on Facebook is not self centered in some way. That's not inherently narcissistic. What narcissistic is when you post that stuff yourself, but can't empathize with others enough not to be annoyed when they do it.
- Sleeep 9y ago
  You don't seem to understand there is difference between sharing and over sharing. I really like sharing but I absolutely loathe over sharing. It's like the difference between a conversation and listening to someone rant.
- jasode 9y ago
  >For my part, Yes, I've already acknowledge that people like you exist but it's not relevant to what I was discussing. But let's continue on that example you gave... >if I consistently like pictures of your kid it means I want to see them on my feed. Right... but when a person complains to her friends that "nobody 'likes' her posts", it then causes some of them to start "liking" the posts just to get her to shut up. This type of dynamic contributes to the phenomenon I'm talking about. >Facebook is inherently about sharing things about yourself: [...] Almost nothing posted on Facebook is not self centered in some way. That's not inherently narcissistic. You're reducing the topic to an absolutism which is not what I'm talking about even though I took great care in the first post to properly qualify the social phenomenon: over-sharing instead of just sharing and "too many personal highlights" instead of just "personal highlights". The NYT author did the same when he wrote, "_excessive_ posting of these pictures". Yes, Facebook is inherently about sharing... just as an old slide carousel is about sharing film photos. The respective technologies' purpose is not the point. To restate... There is a widespread social phenomenon: many of us share more than the audience wants to see. It has a perverse feedback mechanism (social grooming, white lies, polite self-censorship, self-ignorance, etc) that perpetuates the phenomenon across different media (e.g. film slides to Facebook). (This disconnect between posters' (non)curation vs audience receptiveness is also mentioned at the end of the NYT article when the author wrote, "I am trying to calibrate my photographic output. As we all should.") I think that's interesting observation to talk about. Maybe your issue is the word "narcissism"? I used that term because that seems to have the most currency.[1] If there's a better word, make a suggestion. If bringing up the topic itself is toxic and shouldn't be discussed, please explain why. [1] examples: https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+narcissism https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+narcissism

by jasode 9y ago

rayiner 9y ago

Without knowledge of the minds of others, I can only assume they understand how Facebook works. For my part, if I consistently like pictures of your kid it means I want to see them on my feed. Clearly there are people who don't like pictures of peoples' vacations or kids enough to bitch on Reddit about it. I'd call those people narcissists. Facebook is inherently about sharing things about yourself: your kid, your vacation, your new job, your walk by the river, even your political opinions. Almost nothing posted on Facebook is not self centered in some way. That's not inherently narcissistic. What narcissistic is when you post that stuff yourself, but can't empathize with others enough not to be annoyed when they do it.

Sleeep 9y ago
You don't seem to understand there is difference between sharing and over sharing. I really like sharing but I absolutely loathe over sharing. It's like the difference between a conversation and listening to someone rant.
jasode 9y ago
>For my part, Yes, I've already acknowledge that people like you exist but it's not relevant to what I was discussing. But let's continue on that example you gave... >if I consistently like pictures of your kid it means I want to see them on my feed. Right... but when a person complains to her friends that "nobody 'likes' her posts", it then causes some of them to start "liking" the posts just to get her to shut up. This type of dynamic contributes to the phenomenon I'm talking about. >Facebook is inherently about sharing things about yourself: [...] Almost nothing posted on Facebook is not self centered in some way. That's not inherently narcissistic. You're reducing the topic to an absolutism which is not what I'm talking about even though I took great care in the first post to properly qualify the social phenomenon: over-sharing instead of just sharing and "too many personal highlights" instead of just "personal highlights". The NYT author did the same when he wrote, "_excessive_ posting of these pictures". Yes, Facebook is inherently about sharing... just as an old slide carousel is about sharing film photos. The respective technologies' purpose is not the point. To restate... There is a widespread social phenomenon: many of us share more than the audience wants to see. It has a perverse feedback mechanism (social grooming, white lies, polite self-censorship, self-ignorance, etc) that perpetuates the phenomenon across different media (e.g. film slides to Facebook). (This disconnect between posters' (non)curation vs audience receptiveness is also mentioned at the end of the NYT article when the author wrote, "I am trying to calibrate my photographic output. As we all should.") I think that's interesting observation to talk about. Maybe your issue is the word "narcissism"? I used that term because that seems to have the most currency.[1] If there's a better word, make a suggestion. If bringing up the topic itself is toxic and shouldn't be discussed, please explain why. [1] examples: https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+narcissism https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+narcissism