13 ms·

Am I the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media? I use Twitter to follow interesting celebrities and industry professionals. (Adam Savag

Am I the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media? I use Twitter to follow interesting celebrities and industry professionals. (Adam Savage Mythbusters fame, pro climber Alex Honnold, several notable iOS programmers). I rarely interact with any of them, but I find out about lots of interesting things. I use Facebook to keep in touch with friends around the country. I can keep my dad updated to what I've been doing without having to call him. (I still call him, but we can talk about the pictures and things we've seen over the last week or so.) I plan vacations and events with friends. Next weekend I'm going to a bachelor party in the Adirondacks with people from around the country. I've never been worried about my employer seeing my social media profiles. If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Maybe I'm unique in being able to restrain myself. I always hear stories about how people are "so much happier" after they quit Facebook. What is happening on your Facebook that's making you unhappy?

jacobkg 9y ago
For most people there exists a news headline that will ruin their day or at least disrupt their morning e.g "Young child decapitated at amusement park" or "North Korea moves one step closer to nuking Western US" or "Bacon Gives You Cancer". Facebook heavily encourages people to write and share headlines like this (true or not) and then promotes them prominently in your news feed. This can take a heavy emotional toll on people over time and gradually make them more unhappy
- gamblor956 9y ago
  I've never seen stories like that in my Facebook page? Either your have horrible friends or you've responded repeatedly to this type of article in your Facebook feed, resulting in the algorithm promoting those posts. You can remove posts like that from your feed by clicking on the little gear in the top right.
- p1esk 9y ago
  Funny, I probably saw all three headlines you mentioned, here on NH. I just don’t click on ones likely to upset me.
  - ballenf 9y ago
    HN is a social media platform, albeit a niche one. Which is why I think the article was rather overblown, clickbait hyperbole.
- evfanknitram 9y ago
  Is there some study showing that your first sentence is correct? The reason I ask is that I never ever see stuff like that in my feed. Is it your friends who share that kind of stuff or is it showing up as ads or? And why are those people encouraged to share stuff such as bacon giving cancer? In my feed I only see the stuff from friends, such as travel photos, various fun experiences, poems and sometimes comments on local political events. And of course intermittent flooding of happy birthday messages.
  - mygo 9y ago
    facebook has this “trending” section where they show ~3 trending news headlines with a little blurb under each. It’s usually near the top. On the right sidebar on desktop. And yeah it’s often times very depressing headlines such as those. You don’t get that?
    - evfanknitram 9y ago
      No I don't. I'm typically using Facebook app on android and I never see any news. Logged on to desktop version now and none there as well. Scrolled through about 100 items on my feed and the only thing I see are posts from friends and intermittent ads from companies which are "liked" by my friends. I'm guessing maybe it's because I'm in/from Sweden and they haven't set up newsfeeds for this place. I do see how showing negative news to people would have affect on what people post. And maybe it's a cultural thing as well - one of the hot topics in Sweden is immigration but very few people post about it, probably just because it's such a divider and few good things will come out by starting a Facebook discussion.
      - mygo 9y ago
        > I do see how showing negative news to people would have affect on what people post. Get this. Every single time you visit facebook, right above the fold is some depressing news. Every. Single. Time. It has an effect on some.
        9y ago
- delerio 9y ago
  I've never seen stuff like that, but then again I heavily control my fb feed by only following "close" friends and select family members. I don't follow any news sites, and pretty much only follow art pages/ and a few programmers that have public profiles. This has more to do with people who have family/friends who enjoy stuff like that, but it's easily possible to never run across articles like that on fb. I sure haven't.
  - mixmastamyk 9y ago
    Not everyone is lucky enough to have thoughtful relatives, yet not horrible enough to completely shun.
    - Kadin 9y ago
      Isn't that what "unfollow" is for? For people who are obnoxious and you don't want to hear from, but you don't want to actually go all the way to unfriending (which would make it impossible to interact with them at all, basically, and also be noticeable to them). That's how I use it anyway. I've also noticed that FB now has a "snooze for 30 days" option that you can select, instead of just unfollow/unfriend. Not sure how long this has been around (I'm a very casual FB user) but it seems designed with those people who can't help spouting off over and over about a particular current event in mind.
      - mixmastamyk 9y ago
        Yep, what I do as well.
- dfmooreqqq 9y ago
  But that seems like more of a problem with news in general than Facebook - nightly news/news websites include headlines and stories like that - but we shouldn't encourage people to just put their heads in the sand...
- malvosenior 9y ago
  I feel like we should be doing a better job educating people on what a healthy relationship with the media should look like. If a headline can ruin someone’s day that says to me that the affected person doesn’t understand that media companies profit from outrage. This isn’t even a Facebook problem, it’s an independent thought problem. Don’t let the media tell you what to worry about.
- kragen 9y ago
  The bacon thing is maybe a good example of Hamming's Closed Door Paradox: I noticed the following facts about people who work with the door open or the door closed. I notice that if you have the door to your office closed, you get more work done today and tomorrow, and you are more productive than most. But 10 years later somehow you don't know quite know what problems are worth working on; all the hard work you do is sort of tangential in importance. He who works with the door open gets all kinds of interruptions, but he also occasionally gets clues as to what the world is and what might be important. Now I cannot prove the cause and effect sequence because you might say, ``The closed door is symbolic of a closed mind.'' I don't know. But I can say there is a pretty good correlation between those who work with the doors open and those who ultimately do important things, although people who work with doors closed often work harder. Somehow they seem to work on slightly the wrong thing - not much, but enough that they miss fame. http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html In this case, as it turns out, bacon does give you cancer. The relative risk of high "processed meat" consumption is in the neighborhood of 20%, i.e. RR of 1.2, for colorectal and lung cancers. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16991129/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16991129/ In the US, there are about 200k deaths per year from these two cancers, out of 2.7 million total deaths. So your chances of dying of one of these two cancers is about 7.4%, if you live in a place somewhat like the US. And that increases to about 8.9% if you eat a lot of processed meat. It seems to me like a 1.5% chance of dodging a death by cancer, and thus living an extra 5–20 years, is worth a single disrupted morning.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    I'm always perplexed by these contrived scenarios used to demonstrate some point or other. Work with the door closed some of the time, when you need to slog through a task uninterrupted, then open the door to allow the serendipity of uncontrolled interruption.
    - minikites 9y ago
      I didn't make the comment you've replied to but in my opinion, it's less about the specifics of the scenario and more about providing food for thought about _why_ you're working with the door open or closed and in what circumstances you make those choices. If you do one or the other particularly often out of habit, it's helpful to think about why and adjust your habits if necessary.
- JKCalhoun 9y ago
  This is true I think. I have not had broadcast/cable TV on in the house in perhaps 18 years. And yet when I take the family to a hotel and there's CNN/Fox/etc. running in the breakfast room it always seems like the world decided, at that precise moment, to inch close to the brink of Armageddon. Fires blaze in the background behind the reporter, a palpable tension and urgency is heard from the talking heads.... And then I remember that it is just what the news "does" these days — and then realize that the beeping I am hearing is my waffle that is done.
- _mrmnmly 9y ago
  when I receive even single information like this, I see after the author (a.k.a. person who shared it so it is visible on my timeline) and mute his account (or remove it from my contacts). I even take struggle to mark EVERY SINGLE advert on facebook as a spam or inappropriate - I think that may make me a facebook user with most unrelated adverts to my actual interests - and I recommend everyone to do the same.
- briffle 9y ago
  We all convinced Grandma and Uncle Phil to stop sending those emails that end with "forward this email to 5 people today, or you will have bad luck". Unfortunately, they now put the exact same amount of thought into resharing some crap they find on Facebook about government conspiracies, and whatever political party is opposite of theirs.
  - kolpa 9y ago
    And Cousin Nancy and Brother Mohammed and Daughter Svetlana. It's not an 'old people' disease, it's an anyone disease.
- npsimons 9y ago
  > This can take a heavy emotional toll on people over time and gradually make them more unhappy. This is precisely why I stopped paying attention to news and am not on social media.
- sverige 9y ago
  While I agree that pretty much all news media is toxic, the reason Facebook makes people unhappy is that 1) people put on their best show there, and 2) others compare themselves and become discontent. It's the constant comparing of your life to the perception that others have it better that causes all this unhappiness. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/get-out-your-mind/201409/the-unexpected-way-new-technology-makes-us-unhappy https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/get-out-your-mind/20...
  - mixmastamyk 9y ago
    Don't agree. The ugly politics makes me much more unhappy than a friends Hawaii trip.
- swat535 9y ago
  I don't understand your argument... These headlines are all over the news. It's not like not logging to facebook will magically prevent one from seeing them. All you need to do is turn on a local news channel and voila..
  - mygo 9y ago
    I don’t use facebook and I didn’t even know that stephen hawking died before someone texted it to me. Same with that famous pastor who died last month. same with the bridge that collapsed in Miami near Florida International University. The thing about it is, I don’t watch the news much already. I lost all respect for the news during the election when they would literally spend a week covering some sensational / gossip topic. It’s not news it’s entertainment with the occasional coverage of actual news topics. So without social media beaming every trendy headline into my eyes the moment I log in, I am ignorant to a lot of depressing stuff. Someone has to go out of their way to text it to me or I probably won’t see it. And that’s fine by me. (Yet somehow Tomi Lahren still finds a way to make it onto my SMS conversations -_-.) In any case, aside from the depressing sensational media, facebook is also toxic because it can make you compare every aspect of your complicated life to other peoples’ highlight reels.
  - Kadin 9y ago
    That's a pretty good argument for never turning on local news. It's garbage, just the video version of clickbait "journalism" in most cases. (There is some good investigative journalism still being done on TV, but it's overwhelmed by "gotcha" stories and naked if-it-bleeds-it-leads sensationalism.)
- spondyl 9y ago
  As horrific as it was, the NYT's "Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards, Indictment Says" bizarre headline actually made by day :) I had to do a double take and check that I hadn't been redirected to The Onion.
  - jacobkg 9y ago
    Maybe because I have a young son but the headline was so gut wrenching I still haven't been able to read any of the coverage.
- magic_beans 9y ago
  I immediately unfollow or unfriend people who post things like this. I also use the News Feed Eradicator extension. The result is that my mobile feed is full of happy baby photos, and my desktop feed is completely blank.
intrasight 9y ago
If you are able to avoid the distractions then I agree. I am working to wean myself off of Facebook in that I'll only check in once a day. And eventually just once a week. I don't use social media on my phone.
snowwrestler 9y ago
Unhappiness from social media for me happens when social media makes me aware of things that make me unhappy. For example, I get a lot of news from Twitter, and sometimes the news makes me unhappy. I have a great diversity of friends and family on Facebook, and sometimes one will post something I find really distasteful. If I was reading a novel instead of Twitter, I wouldn't experience that unhappiness. The thing with social media is that the content is in such little morsels it's easy to say "just a few more," and the platforms are carefully designed to serve you the kind of content that will keep you saying that. So it's easy to "accidentally" spend way more time reading social media rather than (for example) reading a novel. That can tilt the balance toward more "makes me unhappy" content and less "makes me happy" content. And sadly, the more tired I get, the easier it is make that sort of mistake--and also, the more that sort of unhappy stuff tends to affect me.
- sjg007 9y ago
  I think this is an attention thing.. you notice it in tv and movies as well. Older kids movies are slower paced with less cut scenes. Whereas new movies are faster paced. I think this is due to digital editing capabilities now. Watching these older movies feels boring compared to movies today.
sigzero 9y ago
I am the same way. I don't opt into any of the survey things or re-post the "Here's the things about me" ones. I am using it less though. Just because I want to do so.
ravenstine 9y ago
I do think that it is usually a good thing to ditch social media entirely, but I also think that current attitudes are dismissing the possibility of healthy social media habits. At this point, the only social media I use is Facebook through mbasic.facebook.com. This is really just to act as a rolodex and see peoples' pictures. I hardly interact with it. The reason I use mbasic is to save space and bandwidth, and to prevent Zuck from invading my phone. Because there's no infinite scroll, it prevents me from wasting more time on it. I also simply hide or unfollow anything I don't care for. A friend posts too much political/conspiracy nonsense? Blocked. I followed some company page years ago and now I just get inundated with promotions? Unfollowed. Too many vacation and "my life is great" photos? Blocked. I've consistently avoided the social media anxiety I once had. Facebook is(can be?) a useful product, as much as I don't like Facebook as a company. It wouldn't really be that difficult for someone to build a competitor to Facebook that really just did these few things really well, skipping all the other crap few people really use. Maybe people just assume that in order to have a viable social media product, they have to compete with Facebook on all fronts?
davvolun 9y ago
> If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. I've been thinking about this a lot lately in calling and sending emails to my government representatives, attending marches and protests. By definition, these are done in public; there's no point otherwise! But there's nothing preventing my employer from deciding they don't like what I'm putting out there and doing .. something about it. I don't see anything to be done about this, certainly not in the short term, but it's a very different sort of thing than supposing there's something on social media I would be "embarrassed" about my employer seeing.
- jopsen 9y ago
  Unionize! My union doesn't do collective bargaining negotiations.. I'm a tech worker... It covers me legally should employers take too much of an interest in my personal life, etc... They also run a news paper about engineering topics..
  - davvolun 9y ago
    Unfortunately, "union" is a basically a four-letter word where I am. Also, not trying to overstate my "struggle" or anything -- the reason I'm active politically is because of the impact on people I care about, not the impact on me. I'm fully aware I'm pretty damn privileged to be able to write what I wrote above.
- funkymike 9y ago
  It's not just about keeping potentially embarrassing things off social media. Everyone has biases. If you post something political, religious, etc. that really isn't controversial, that may still lead a potential employee who sees it to pass you over, intentionally or not.
  - davvolun 9y ago
    I think I understand what you're getting at. Additionally, how would you even prove "well I didn't hire that person because they belong to the wrong political party" short of someone actually saying it and documenting it against themselves? Racial discrimination laws can be exceptionally difficult to enforce, as I understand it. In an ideal world, what my employer thinks shouldn't affect my political actions. As usual, real and ideal are far apart.
psyc 9y ago
I only use Twitter, and I only follow interesting or noteworthy people in my specific industry. I've been exposed to interesting techniques and papers, made valuable connections, and found paid jobs. However, I have also felt distracted and distressed by the significant amount of [men vs women, black vs white, gay vs straight, cis vs trans] bickering and put-downs coming from even these people, because apparently that's what you do on Twitter. It's a trade-off, but I cannot call this healthy.
JustSomeNobody 9y ago
> I've never been worried about my employer seeing my social media profiles. If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Maybe I'm unique in being able to restrain myself. Me either, but maybe there's a chilling effect going on here. EDIT: > I always hear stories about how people are "so much happier" after they quit Facebook. What is happening on your Facebook that's making you unhappy? I personally believe this is because it's orders of magnitude easier to be negative than positive. Negativity breeds more negativity and drama. So, when people quit Facebook they get a boost from not being around so much negativity.
tonyedgecombe 9y ago
What is happening on your Facebook that's making you unhappy? Not me because I haven't been on social media for years but I'm guessing it's comparison. If your friends are posting photos of their holiday in Bali and you only managed a camping trip over the weekend then how is that going to make you feel? Add in the doom and gloom in the news that tells you things have never been so bad and you can see it isn't healthy.
- dexterdog 9y ago
  The problem is that most people in the moment think that they are above this kind of feeling because it's not something you realize. That's why you need long-term studies to determine it. People won't admit to being petty like this, but the sad reality is that most of us are.
  - tonyedgecombe 9y ago
    Yes, I suspect those that deny it are probably most affected. I'm reminded of my parents who insist reading their newspaper doesn't affect their thinking yet they can't help but regurgitate its headlines every time I visit.
- Karunamon 9y ago
  >If your friends are posting photos of their holiday in Bali and you only managed a camping trip over the weekend then how is that going to make you feel? Happy that your friends are having a good time? Why does the default mode of human interaction need to be seething jealousy?
dragonwriter 9y ago
> I've never been worried about my employer seeing my social media profiles. If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Employers (and potential employers, for job applicants) don't use access to social media only to see what you post to social media and judge you by that, they can (and do) use it to see who you are connected to on social media, what they post about you, and what they post about other things, and judge you by that. They can also use it as a pretext to discern things that are protected by anti-discrimination law and which they would not ask you about directly for fear of lawsuits, as a means of difficult-to-detect unlawful discrimination, using, again, not only what you post, but information from others that is connected to your profile. Now, you can limit your interaction in one of the prime mechanisms of social communication in modern society to mitigate the risks that poses (which itself undermines the point of legal protections, especially for things like religion and, in California, political affiliation), or you can, as many people do, create what essentially amounts to a bogus profile that simulates doing that which is shared with prospective employers, but neither of those are ideal.
jancsika 9y ago
> If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Maybe I'm unique in being able to restrain myself. Another possibility occurs to me: you are on a path in your life where, for whatever reason, you rarely engage politically with the world. Or at least you rarely engage politically in a way that would bring a substantial risk to your career, personal, or political life. Or you are lucky enough to be in a situation where you don't have to do that in order to protect yourself. I'm not implying that you do this consciously (though that is a possibility). It may be something like the mathematician who finds a job at the NSA that fits their interests like a glove and burrows away their for the rest of their life. There is certainly nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with the person who just "clicks" with adversarial political action their whole adult life. However, while I'm not particularly political myself it takes me maybe 3 seconds to imagine people who are (esp. people affected by Trump administrations policy toward immigration). So I'm left confused by your apparent inability to do the same. I am certainly not unique in being able to empathize with people who's safety is at risk from Facebook's creepy, leaky, sniff-it-all system of social media.
- cgmg 9y ago
  > you rarely engage politically with the world Why do you think arguing on social media is the only or even best way to engage politically with the world? > So I'm left confused by your apparent inability to do the same. Inability to do what?
  - funkymike 9y ago
    > Why do you think arguing on social media is the only or even best way to engage politically with the world? If Facebook is one of the primary ways you interact with a set of people, then it is natural you would exchange political ideas with them on Facebook. Having to take any political (or other potentially controversial) discussion to a separate communication medium makes Facebook rather bland. It's requires a form of self censorship.
- whatyoucantsay 9y ago
  You're shaming someone for having low stress, bland social media habits.
keb_ 9y ago
Yes, you are the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media.
scarecrowbob 9y ago
Well, I used to think I had a healthy relationship with drinking, but ohhh... Not that social media is the same thing at all. But I have a degree in philosophy and was trained in my formative years to argue with folks. That's a terrible mode to be in on social media-- it doesn't serve the people around me and it doesn't serve me at all. So I stopped arguing and just posted nice things, like songs I sing or good things that happen to me or pictures of my kids. The problem (for me, maybe not for everyone else) is that: - I can't really get out of the mode of arguing - I'm constantly encountering people I love casually sharing memes that say that "people like me" are the root cause of all societal problems - I'm constantly reading between a bunch of lines and seeing where folks I love are in fact doing terrible things for their families and relationships. So, like, that's not at all a fun mode to be in And it's worse when I have an impulse to check in on it dozens of times a day. To add to conversations that are dumb, to check in on some situation or other that has nothing to do with me, or whatever. So no, I don't think that there is a super healthy way for me, personally, to work with Facebook specifically. The other stuff, I dunno. I don't mind message boards, instagram, etc. But I really gotta stay off FB. Just like alcohol, it did a bunch of good things for me and I was using it for those good benefits, but just like alcohol it bundles its own problems.
- drewmol 9y ago
  >But I have a degree in philosophy and was trained in my formative years to argue with folks. Interestingly, the way we often teach debate is: Someone can argue either side of an issue, and be judged on the approach, successful influence or tactics used, with insufficient weight on the merits of the position. I suspect this helps promote the climate that is reflected in your followup statement: >I can't really get out of the mode of arguing - I'm constantly encountering people I love casually sharing memes that say that "people like me" are the root cause of all societal problems - I'm constantly reading between a bunch of lines and seeing where folks I love are in fact doing terrible things for their families and relationships.
  - scarecrowbob 9y ago
    To a great extent, I see people formally arguing well (or, at the very least, trying to signal that they are arguing well) but so many argue for absurd propositions and hellish conclusions. Much of my thought over the last couple of years centers on how much of our rationalist skills are honed around developing resistance strategies. I believe that we have far more and better mental tools at our disposal for telling us that we are being rational than we actually have tools for being rational. Maybe that is, in itself an irrational belief. It's kind of difficult to justify, but it feels correct, so I kneel doan and act as if I believe it, especially with regards to my own thought patterns. At the very least, however, logic and rationality only operate well if we have a common set of quality premises. So even with a good education in rhetoric we often can't get out of our heads enough to look for truth instead of seek the gratification of justifying ourselves. Heck, my MA concentrates on rhetoric and community, and I have a hard time simply being okay when I generally agree with folks who are saying nutty things because of their poor logical skills. And so I can't really be around an environment that foments that kind of casual bad thought.
_jal 9y ago
> If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Not everyone has that freedom. Gay people in rural Alabama, women in the UAE, undocumented immigrants in Arizona. People fleeing abusive spouses. > Am I the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media? Doubtful, but you are a person who doesn't face serious consequences for existing.
- ovao 9y ago
  Employers should already know whether an Arizona employee’s status is illegal or not, as this is required by law.
- RandallBrown 9y ago
  If you're gay in rural Alabama, and you feel uncomfortable posting about it on Facebook because someone you know might find out, you probably aren't super comfortable going to the store or out on a date with your SO either. But you do bring up a good point. My place of privilege in society makes it a lot easier to use Facebook without fearing the same repercussions as other people.
- mixmastamyk 9y ago
  Or a job where you must present a bland public image.
aylmao 9y ago
+1. I personally think this near-constant bashing of social media is getting ridiculous. These past two weeks have been all-in, article after article, non-stop. Is social media bad? You can definitely have a non-healthy relationship with it. But it didn't "break politics" [1] or "elect Trump" [2]. It was mostly just another vector for advertising. We've known of the privacy issues with Facebook for a while and the whole Cambridge Analytica thing had been in the news before this spree of bad press. We've known Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat are distracting for years. I'm starting to wonder if what's going on here is some sort of war/defence by established media against big tech/social media. We know Murdoch was straight about going to war against Facebook [3] (apparently they lobbied heavily against Google in Europe before too). It wouldn't surprise me if other big-media magnates are in on this too. After all, didn't Facebook cut a bunch of newsfeed traffic to news sites in January? Big media has always been an incredibly lucrative, power-wielding business, because it largely controls the public's opinion. I almost feel like it was bound to happen; big media was bound to claim it's the bastion of truth and scare people out of social media. Now, of course, things aren't black and white. I'm not saying one is good and the other is bad, but that's precisely my point. I see traditional media focusing very heavily this past two weeks on painting social media as bad. Trumps election and the whole "fake news" accusations apparently was amazing for their business [4]. The NYT crossed $1billion in revenue in 2017, with strong growth [5]. Asking people nicely won't get you subscribers, when people are scared because "democracy is at stake" then they pour in. I don't know. Uber literally just killed a woman with a self-driving car: I would've assumed the repercussions of that would be huge and everyone would be talking about the legal aspects of self-driving tech, the future of testing, security, safety, and investigation, etc. But I have seen more articles about Facebook and social media in general in a day than I saw about Uber all of last week. [1]: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/12/15259438/social-media-political-polarization https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/12/15259438/s... [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/20/17138854/cambridge-analytica-facebook-data-trump-campaign-psychographic-microtargeting https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/20/17138854/cambridge-analyt... [3]: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-threatened-mark-zuckerberg-in-2016-with-a-war.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-thre... [4]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/06/is-donald-trump-saving-the-news-media/?utm_term=.5ccc61ae23fc https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/06/is... [5]: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/business/new-york-times-company-earnings.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/business/new-york-times-c...
dgzl 9y ago
For myself, social media (Facebook) makes me upset for several reasons. Besides the usual reasons of seeing disturbing news and advertisements, being manipulated by the system, and the creepy feeling of being digitally analyzed for profit, there exists a more serious problem. I have friends from all over the spectrum, from poor to wealthy, simple to intelligent, young to old. However I find something in almost all of my friend's posts (or reposts) that I highly disagree with (either by fact or opinion), and feel socially compelled not to stand up against their message. I've tried engaging in logical or political conversion with my friends, but it almost always backfires, usually because either a) the conversation is too much for them and they concede, or b) swarms of like-minded bystanders join and dominate via mob-rule. Usually, in neither of these situations does the original poster really consider changing their position. Topics that I come across that make me cringe could be family who perpetuate crystal healing or conspiracy theories, or co-workers who repost anti-Constitution political rhetoric. How is a moderate Libertarian supposed to survive on social media, ignoring nonsense from their friends and family?
- logiclion 9y ago
  I've also thought this exact thing, the reality is (to me at least) everyone processes information and forms opinions differently. The climate of political discourse, in my opinion, has a large majority in a defensive mindset. What people express as an opinion or 'thought' on social media is currently from the same place I believe. We are so used to being 'sold' a message on these platforms, that we forget the real 'purpose'. Which I believe is, social validation from peers. Not to think the same, but to be reinforced that it's okay to have a opinion and that I can recognize as my own, separate from others. Individuality can be chaotic but there's a good side to it...
- hathawsh 9y ago
  When I want to reply to posts like that, I ponder until I can think of something to say that is short, simple, and kind. My goal is not to correct them but rather to build a relationship of trust. If they learn to trust me, they are far more likely to join my side on important matters. Also consider that most people don't have your writing skills and will get frustrated when they try to engage in a debate with you in writing. Most people are more comfortable when speaking (especially face to face) rather than writing. That's why most of the real political discussion continues to happen offline, even today.
bitumen 9y ago
Not at all, I’ve always had a very healthy relationship, insofar as I’ve never made an account on Facebook or a Twitter or anything like it. I’ve always been amazed that supposedly smart people don’t understand the simple truth of the internet: once you upload something, it’s online forever. If you’re not 100% sure that what you’re sharing is something you want associated with you until the day you die, don’t share it. As I’m not capable of seeing into the future, the only sane choice is not to share in the first place. Close and meaningful relationships with other people were possible before they were cynically monetized by social media, and they’re still possible without it. When it comes to social media, the only winning move is not to play, and/or be anonymous. The alternative is that some 14 year old can DOXX you, SWAT you, and generally make your life miserable. The alternative is that your boss sees something they don’t like and you lose your job.
zombieprocesses 9y ago
> Am I the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media? You are confusing a propaganda campaign against social media with actual news. Also keep in mind that the author of the Op-Ed was pushing a book he was writing. Billions of people have a healthy relationship with social media. Just like billions of people have a healthy relationship with alcohol, food, working out, tv, sports, cars, etc. But it's funny how every day we are bombarded by the news media on social media ( ironically enough ) about how evil facebook and social media is. OP's post is from November 2016. Why do you think it was posted on HN? Billions of dollars being spent on "cambridge analytics" style firms to put pressure on facebook, google and social media in general. So expect to see a lot of social media bashing as the elites try to reign in social media. That's all it is. Once zuckerburg bends the knee like most social media entities have, the media and the will back off. Just like they did with reddit and google/youtube.
- 9889095r3jh 9y ago
  Why would the elites try to reign in social media? If I were an "elite" I'd want everyone to be on social media, except me. I'd want them revealing all the intimate details of their life, so I can better manipulate them with targted advertising. You don't need a conspiracy theory to explain the recent uptick in articles about social media's negative effects. It's called a news cycle. People write stories about things people are talking about. All year, Social Media has been in the spotlight for privacy blunders and news that nation states spread propoganda with bots. So people like Cal Newport are talking about it. Remember when lead was discovered in Flint, MI's water supply? And then there was an uptick in stories about lead poisoning? That's how news works, for better or worse.
  - zombieprocesses 9y ago
    > Why would the elites try to reign in social media? To better control it? > I'd want them revealing all the intimate details of their life, so I can better manipulate them with targted advertising. Yes. As long as they control the targeting and advertising. > You don't need a conspiracy theory to explain the recent uptick in articles about social media's negative effects. It's not a conspiracy. It's reality. It's what happened with every communication medium. Print, Radio, Film, TV and now the internet. To believe otherwise is the real conspiracy. > It's called a news cycle. It doesn't span years. > Remember when lead was discovered in Flint, MI's water supply? And then there was an uptick in stories about lead poisoning? Crazy how quickly that downed down huh? That the elites want to control the means of communication is standard policy for thousands of years. And it spans all nations. The chinese elite, russian elite, saudi elite, the european elites, etc all want to control communication. Our elites aren't different. Societies, like humans, have similar organs.
justjash 9y ago
I use Facebook pretty sparingly with a small group of friends and family so I don't really share too much except for photos. I don't think I post anything bad, but I'd rather not have an employer start making assumptions about me based on a few small bits posted on the internet. I've always felt that the less personal information my employer/co-workers know the better, but I am also one of those people who have a pretty barren cube. The thing that makes me unhappy about Facebook is that it almost seems like too much work to make it worthwhile. Adjusting privacy settings, blocking/limiting certain peoples posts, etc. is just something that I don't like to do. I could care less that someone commented on a video or shared some garbage click bait.
snarfy 9y ago
> I can keep my dad updated to what I've been doing without having to call him. I can't. Some algorithm at Facebook has deemed my posts not worthy enough for his feed. If I could keep up with life events on it I would still use it. But I can't. My news feed looks like chain mail from grandma.
- RealityVoid 9y ago
  I had the same issue and filtered some content and now I have a decent feed. The thing is, I don't really use the feed, more interesting for me are notifications from groups, the messenger and the instant reconnection potential of FB since near anyone is there.
sergiotapia 9y ago
Regardless, there's very little to gain by having public profiles; and everything to lose. Go anonymous, it worked in the 90s and now it's like we've been spellbound by corporations to go personal.
- erik_seaberg 9y ago
  Running a panopticon (shadow profiles, evercookies, etc.) has become so cheap that you have to start thinking about opsec to keep an anon account from being linked back to you.
tjr225 9y ago
You can do all of those things without Facebook. I'm not saying one way is right or wrong...I'm just saying. I haven't had a Facebook since 2011 or so and I don't even remember why I got rid of it...but there has been no compelling reason for me to use it since.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
whatyoucantsay 9y ago
Well done! It sounds like you've done well at avoiding the various social media landmines. I suspect most suffer from facebook because of its Skinner Box nature and due to comparing their real selves with their peer's crafted outward-facing personas.
sifoo 9y ago
How can you be so sure that's the case? It's generally very difficult to get a wider perspective from within the fish bowl, you need to step out to feel the difference. What I found, and the reason I ultimately dropped out; is that social networks make me think less of others, because it makes them look stupid and desperate; and I'm pretty sure that goes the other way as well. The corporate incentives to fuck around with our minds for profit in these networks are just too much to deal with; the entire game is rigged, there's no way to win.
drc555 9y ago
Twitter you can carefully curate what you want to see. Facebook , you don't decide to curate what you want to see ( exclude ads )
alexandercrohde 9y ago
Just as a counter to this, consider something like linked in. Suppose you innocently get a new job, and it doesn't work out pretty quickly (e.g. within a month you realize it was a huge mistake). Suppose you also marked this job on your linked in. Now you have to ask yourself if linked In is selling this private information to new employers about this recent bad-role. Also, there are firms that sell info to your employer about you updating your linked in (because it may mean you're looking to quit). So it could affect your career negatively, even if you're super happy and don't see the effects directly.

jacobkg 9y ago

For most people there exists a news headline that will ruin their day or at least disrupt their morning e.g "Young child decapitated at amusement park" or "North Korea moves one step closer to nuking Western US" or "Bacon Gives You Cancer". Facebook heavily encourages people to write and share headlines like this (true or not) and then promotes them prominently in your news feed. This can take a heavy emotional toll on people over time and gradually make them more unhappy

gamblor956 9y ago
I've never seen stories like that in my Facebook page? Either your have horrible friends or you've responded repeatedly to this type of article in your Facebook feed, resulting in the algorithm promoting those posts. You can remove posts like that from your feed by clicking on the little gear in the top right.
p1esk 9y ago
Funny, I probably saw all three headlines you mentioned, here on NH. I just don’t click on ones likely to upset me.
- ballenf 9y ago
  HN is a social media platform, albeit a niche one. Which is why I think the article was rather overblown, clickbait hyperbole.
evfanknitram 9y ago
Is there some study showing that your first sentence is correct? The reason I ask is that I never ever see stuff like that in my feed. Is it your friends who share that kind of stuff or is it showing up as ads or? And why are those people encouraged to share stuff such as bacon giving cancer? In my feed I only see the stuff from friends, such as travel photos, various fun experiences, poems and sometimes comments on local political events. And of course intermittent flooding of happy birthday messages.
- mygo 9y ago
  facebook has this “trending” section where they show ~3 trending news headlines with a little blurb under each. It’s usually near the top. On the right sidebar on desktop. And yeah it’s often times very depressing headlines such as those. You don’t get that?
  - evfanknitram 9y ago
    No I don't. I'm typically using Facebook app on android and I never see any news. Logged on to desktop version now and none there as well. Scrolled through about 100 items on my feed and the only thing I see are posts from friends and intermittent ads from companies which are "liked" by my friends. I'm guessing maybe it's because I'm in/from Sweden and they haven't set up newsfeeds for this place. I do see how showing negative news to people would have affect on what people post. And maybe it's a cultural thing as well - one of the hot topics in Sweden is immigration but very few people post about it, probably just because it's such a divider and few good things will come out by starting a Facebook discussion.
    - mygo 9y ago
      > I do see how showing negative news to people would have affect on what people post. Get this. Every single time you visit facebook, right above the fold is some depressing news. Every. Single. Time. It has an effect on some.
      - 9y ago
delerio 9y ago
I've never seen stuff like that, but then again I heavily control my fb feed by only following "close" friends and select family members. I don't follow any news sites, and pretty much only follow art pages/ and a few programmers that have public profiles. This has more to do with people who have family/friends who enjoy stuff like that, but it's easily possible to never run across articles like that on fb. I sure haven't.
- mixmastamyk 9y ago
  Not everyone is lucky enough to have thoughtful relatives, yet not horrible enough to completely shun.
  - Kadin 9y ago
    Isn't that what "unfollow" is for? For people who are obnoxious and you don't want to hear from, but you don't want to actually go all the way to unfriending (which would make it impossible to interact with them at all, basically, and also be noticeable to them). That's how I use it anyway. I've also noticed that FB now has a "snooze for 30 days" option that you can select, instead of just unfollow/unfriend. Not sure how long this has been around (I'm a very casual FB user) but it seems designed with those people who can't help spouting off over and over about a particular current event in mind.
    - mixmastamyk 9y ago
      Yep, what I do as well.
dfmooreqqq 9y ago
But that seems like more of a problem with news in general than Facebook - nightly news/news websites include headlines and stories like that - but we shouldn't encourage people to just put their heads in the sand...
malvosenior 9y ago
I feel like we should be doing a better job educating people on what a healthy relationship with the media should look like. If a headline can ruin someone’s day that says to me that the affected person doesn’t understand that media companies profit from outrage. This isn’t even a Facebook problem, it’s an independent thought problem. Don’t let the media tell you what to worry about.
kragen 9y ago
The bacon thing is maybe a good example of Hamming's Closed Door Paradox: I noticed the following facts about people who work with the door open or the door closed. I notice that if you have the door to your office closed, you get more work done today and tomorrow, and you are more productive than most. But 10 years later somehow you don't know quite know what problems are worth working on; all the hard work you do is sort of tangential in importance. He who works with the door open gets all kinds of interruptions, but he also occasionally gets clues as to what the world is and what might be important. Now I cannot prove the cause and effect sequence because you might say, ``The closed door is symbolic of a closed mind.'' I don't know. But I can say there is a pretty good correlation between those who work with the doors open and those who ultimately do important things, although people who work with doors closed often work harder. Somehow they seem to work on slightly the wrong thing - not much, but enough that they miss fame. http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html In this case, as it turns out, bacon does give you cancer. The relative risk of high "processed meat" consumption is in the neighborhood of 20%, i.e. RR of 1.2, for colorectal and lung cancers. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16991129/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16991129/ In the US, there are about 200k deaths per year from these two cancers, out of 2.7 million total deaths. So your chances of dying of one of these two cancers is about 7.4%, if you live in a place somewhat like the US. And that increases to about 8.9% if you eat a lot of processed meat. It seems to me like a 1.5% chance of dodging a death by cancer, and thus living an extra 5–20 years, is worth a single disrupted morning.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  I'm always perplexed by these contrived scenarios used to demonstrate some point or other. Work with the door closed some of the time, when you need to slog through a task uninterrupted, then open the door to allow the serendipity of uncontrolled interruption.
  - minikites 9y ago
    I didn't make the comment you've replied to but in my opinion, it's less about the specifics of the scenario and more about providing food for thought about _why_ you're working with the door open or closed and in what circumstances you make those choices. If you do one or the other particularly often out of habit, it's helpful to think about why and adjust your habits if necessary.
JKCalhoun 9y ago
This is true I think. I have not had broadcast/cable TV on in the house in perhaps 18 years. And yet when I take the family to a hotel and there's CNN/Fox/etc. running in the breakfast room it always seems like the world decided, at that precise moment, to inch close to the brink of Armageddon. Fires blaze in the background behind the reporter, a palpable tension and urgency is heard from the talking heads.... And then I remember that it is just what the news "does" these days — and then realize that the beeping I am hearing is my waffle that is done.
_mrmnmly 9y ago
when I receive even single information like this, I see after the author (a.k.a. person who shared it so it is visible on my timeline) and mute his account (or remove it from my contacts). I even take struggle to mark EVERY SINGLE advert on facebook as a spam or inappropriate - I think that may make me a facebook user with most unrelated adverts to my actual interests - and I recommend everyone to do the same.
briffle 9y ago
We all convinced Grandma and Uncle Phil to stop sending those emails that end with "forward this email to 5 people today, or you will have bad luck". Unfortunately, they now put the exact same amount of thought into resharing some crap they find on Facebook about government conspiracies, and whatever political party is opposite of theirs.
- kolpa 9y ago
  And Cousin Nancy and Brother Mohammed and Daughter Svetlana. It's not an 'old people' disease, it's an anyone disease.
npsimons 9y ago
> This can take a heavy emotional toll on people over time and gradually make them more unhappy. This is precisely why I stopped paying attention to news and am not on social media.
sverige 9y ago
While I agree that pretty much all news media is toxic, the reason Facebook makes people unhappy is that 1) people put on their best show there, and 2) others compare themselves and become discontent. It's the constant comparing of your life to the perception that others have it better that causes all this unhappiness. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/get-out-your-mind/201409/the-unexpected-way-new-technology-makes-us-unhappy https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/get-out-your-mind/20...
- mixmastamyk 9y ago
  Don't agree. The ugly politics makes me much more unhappy than a friends Hawaii trip.
swat535 9y ago
I don't understand your argument... These headlines are all over the news. It's not like not logging to facebook will magically prevent one from seeing them. All you need to do is turn on a local news channel and voila..
- mygo 9y ago
  I don’t use facebook and I didn’t even know that stephen hawking died before someone texted it to me. Same with that famous pastor who died last month. same with the bridge that collapsed in Miami near Florida International University. The thing about it is, I don’t watch the news much already. I lost all respect for the news during the election when they would literally spend a week covering some sensational / gossip topic. It’s not news it’s entertainment with the occasional coverage of actual news topics. So without social media beaming every trendy headline into my eyes the moment I log in, I am ignorant to a lot of depressing stuff. Someone has to go out of their way to text it to me or I probably won’t see it. And that’s fine by me. (Yet somehow Tomi Lahren still finds a way to make it onto my SMS conversations -_-.) In any case, aside from the depressing sensational media, facebook is also toxic because it can make you compare every aspect of your complicated life to other peoples’ highlight reels.
- Kadin 9y ago
  That's a pretty good argument for never turning on local news. It's garbage, just the video version of clickbait "journalism" in most cases. (There is some good investigative journalism still being done on TV, but it's overwhelmed by "gotcha" stories and naked if-it-bleeds-it-leads sensationalism.)
spondyl 9y ago
As horrific as it was, the NYT's "Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards, Indictment Says" bizarre headline actually made by day :) I had to do a double take and check that I hadn't been redirected to The Onion.
- jacobkg 9y ago
  Maybe because I have a young son but the headline was so gut wrenching I still haven't been able to read any of the coverage.
magic_beans 9y ago
I immediately unfollow or unfriend people who post things like this. I also use the News Feed Eradicator extension. The result is that my mobile feed is full of happy baby photos, and my desktop feed is completely blank.

intrasight 9y ago

If you are able to avoid the distractions then I agree. I am working to wean myself off of Facebook in that I'll only check in once a day. And eventually just once a week. I don't use social media on my phone.

snowwrestler 9y ago

Unhappiness from social media for me happens when social media makes me aware of things that make me unhappy. For example, I get a lot of news from Twitter, and sometimes the news makes me unhappy. I have a great diversity of friends and family on Facebook, and sometimes one will post something I find really distasteful. If I was reading a novel instead of Twitter, I wouldn't experience that unhappiness. The thing with social media is that the content is in such little morsels it's easy to say "just a few more," and the platforms are carefully designed to serve you the kind of content that will keep you saying that. So it's easy to "accidentally" spend way more time reading social media rather than (for example) reading a novel. That can tilt the balance toward more "makes me unhappy" content and less "makes me happy" content. And sadly, the more tired I get, the easier it is make that sort of mistake--and also, the more that sort of unhappy stuff tends to affect me.

sjg007 9y ago
I think this is an attention thing.. you notice it in tv and movies as well. Older kids movies are slower paced with less cut scenes. Whereas new movies are faster paced. I think this is due to digital editing capabilities now. Watching these older movies feels boring compared to movies today.

sigzero 9y ago

I am the same way. I don't opt into any of the survey things or re-post the "Here's the things about me" ones. I am using it less though. Just because I want to do so.

ravenstine 9y ago

I do think that it is usually a good thing to ditch social media entirely, but I also think that current attitudes are dismissing the possibility of healthy social media habits. At this point, the only social media I use is Facebook through mbasic.facebook.com. This is really just to act as a rolodex and see peoples' pictures. I hardly interact with it. The reason I use mbasic is to save space and bandwidth, and to prevent Zuck from invading my phone. Because there's no infinite scroll, it prevents me from wasting more time on it. I also simply hide or unfollow anything I don't care for. A friend posts too much political/conspiracy nonsense? Blocked. I followed some company page years ago and now I just get inundated with promotions? Unfollowed. Too many vacation and "my life is great" photos? Blocked. I've consistently avoided the social media anxiety I once had. Facebook is(can be?) a useful product, as much as I don't like Facebook as a company. It wouldn't really be that difficult for someone to build a competitor to Facebook that really just did these few things really well, skipping all the other crap few people really use. Maybe people just assume that in order to have a viable social media product, they have to compete with Facebook on all fronts?

davvolun 9y ago

> If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. I've been thinking about this a lot lately in calling and sending emails to my government representatives, attending marches and protests. By definition, these are done in public; there's no point otherwise! But there's nothing preventing my employer from deciding they don't like what I'm putting out there and doing .. something about it. I don't see anything to be done about this, certainly not in the short term, but it's a very different sort of thing than supposing there's something on social media I would be "embarrassed" about my employer seeing.

jopsen 9y ago
Unionize! My union doesn't do collective bargaining negotiations.. I'm a tech worker... It covers me legally should employers take too much of an interest in my personal life, etc... They also run a news paper about engineering topics..
- davvolun 9y ago
  Unfortunately, "union" is a basically a four-letter word where I am. Also, not trying to overstate my "struggle" or anything -- the reason I'm active politically is because of the impact on people I care about, not the impact on me. I'm fully aware I'm pretty damn privileged to be able to write what I wrote above.
funkymike 9y ago
It's not just about keeping potentially embarrassing things off social media. Everyone has biases. If you post something political, religious, etc. that really isn't controversial, that may still lead a potential employee who sees it to pass you over, intentionally or not.
- davvolun 9y ago
  I think I understand what you're getting at. Additionally, how would you even prove "well I didn't hire that person because they belong to the wrong political party" short of someone actually saying it and documenting it against themselves? Racial discrimination laws can be exceptionally difficult to enforce, as I understand it. In an ideal world, what my employer thinks shouldn't affect my political actions. As usual, real and ideal are far apart.

psyc 9y ago

I only use Twitter, and I only follow interesting or noteworthy people in my specific industry. I've been exposed to interesting techniques and papers, made valuable connections, and found paid jobs. However, I have also felt distracted and distressed by the significant amount of [men vs women, black vs white, gay vs straight, cis vs trans] bickering and put-downs coming from even these people, because apparently that's what you do on Twitter. It's a trade-off, but I cannot call this healthy.

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

> I've never been worried about my employer seeing my social media profiles. If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Maybe I'm unique in being able to restrain myself. Me either, but maybe there's a chilling effect going on here. EDIT: > I always hear stories about how people are "so much happier" after they quit Facebook. What is happening on your Facebook that's making you unhappy? I personally believe this is because it's orders of magnitude easier to be negative than positive. Negativity breeds more negativity and drama. So, when people quit Facebook they get a boost from not being around so much negativity.

tonyedgecombe 9y ago

What is happening on your Facebook that's making you unhappy? Not me because I haven't been on social media for years but I'm guessing it's comparison. If your friends are posting photos of their holiday in Bali and you only managed a camping trip over the weekend then how is that going to make you feel? Add in the doom and gloom in the news that tells you things have never been so bad and you can see it isn't healthy.

dexterdog 9y ago
The problem is that most people in the moment think that they are above this kind of feeling because it's not something you realize. That's why you need long-term studies to determine it. People won't admit to being petty like this, but the sad reality is that most of us are.
- tonyedgecombe 9y ago
  Yes, I suspect those that deny it are probably most affected. I'm reminded of my parents who insist reading their newspaper doesn't affect their thinking yet they can't help but regurgitate its headlines every time I visit.
Karunamon 9y ago
>If your friends are posting photos of their holiday in Bali and you only managed a camping trip over the weekend then how is that going to make you feel? Happy that your friends are having a good time? Why does the default mode of human interaction need to be seething jealousy?

dragonwriter 9y ago

> I've never been worried about my employer seeing my social media profiles. If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Employers (and potential employers, for job applicants) don't use access to social media only to see what you post to social media and judge you by that, they can (and do) use it to see who you are connected to on social media, what they post about you, and what they post about other things, and judge you by that. They can also use it as a pretext to discern things that are protected by anti-discrimination law and which they would not ask you about directly for fear of lawsuits, as a means of difficult-to-detect unlawful discrimination, using, again, not only what you post, but information from others that is connected to your profile. Now, you can limit your interaction in one of the prime mechanisms of social communication in modern society to mitigate the risks that poses (which itself undermines the point of legal protections, especially for things like religion and, in California, political affiliation), or you can, as many people do, create what essentially amounts to a bogus profile that simulates doing that which is shared with prospective employers, but neither of those are ideal.

jancsika 9y ago

> If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Maybe I'm unique in being able to restrain myself. Another possibility occurs to me: you are on a path in your life where, for whatever reason, you rarely engage politically with the world. Or at least you rarely engage politically in a way that would bring a substantial risk to your career, personal, or political life. Or you are lucky enough to be in a situation where you don't have to do that in order to protect yourself. I'm not implying that you do this consciously (though that is a possibility). It may be something like the mathematician who finds a job at the NSA that fits their interests like a glove and burrows away their for the rest of their life. There is certainly nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with the person who just "clicks" with adversarial political action their whole adult life. However, while I'm not particularly political myself it takes me maybe 3 seconds to imagine people who are (esp. people affected by Trump administrations policy toward immigration). So I'm left confused by your apparent inability to do the same. I am certainly not unique in being able to empathize with people who's safety is at risk from Facebook's creepy, leaky, sniff-it-all system of social media.

cgmg 9y ago
> you rarely engage politically with the world Why do you think arguing on social media is the only or even best way to engage politically with the world? > So I'm left confused by your apparent inability to do the same. Inability to do what?
- funkymike 9y ago
  > Why do you think arguing on social media is the only or even best way to engage politically with the world? If Facebook is one of the primary ways you interact with a set of people, then it is natural you would exchange political ideas with them on Facebook. Having to take any political (or other potentially controversial) discussion to a separate communication medium makes Facebook rather bland. It's requires a form of self censorship.
whatyoucantsay 9y ago
You're shaming someone for having low stress, bland social media habits.

keb_ 9y ago

Yes, you are the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media.

scarecrowbob 9y ago

Well, I used to think I had a healthy relationship with drinking, but ohhh... Not that social media is the same thing at all. But I have a degree in philosophy and was trained in my formative years to argue with folks. That's a terrible mode to be in on social media-- it doesn't serve the people around me and it doesn't serve me at all. So I stopped arguing and just posted nice things, like songs I sing or good things that happen to me or pictures of my kids. The problem (for me, maybe not for everyone else) is that: - I can't really get out of the mode of arguing - I'm constantly encountering people I love casually sharing memes that say that "people like me" are the root cause of all societal problems - I'm constantly reading between a bunch of lines and seeing where folks I love are in fact doing terrible things for their families and relationships. So, like, that's not at all a fun mode to be in And it's worse when I have an impulse to check in on it dozens of times a day. To add to conversations that are dumb, to check in on some situation or other that has nothing to do with me, or whatever. So no, I don't think that there is a super healthy way for me, personally, to work with Facebook specifically. The other stuff, I dunno. I don't mind message boards, instagram, etc. But I really gotta stay off FB. Just like alcohol, it did a bunch of good things for me and I was using it for those good benefits, but just like alcohol it bundles its own problems.

drewmol 9y ago
>But I have a degree in philosophy and was trained in my formative years to argue with folks. Interestingly, the way we often teach debate is: Someone can argue either side of an issue, and be judged on the approach, successful influence or tactics used, with insufficient weight on the merits of the position. I suspect this helps promote the climate that is reflected in your followup statement: >I can't really get out of the mode of arguing - I'm constantly encountering people I love casually sharing memes that say that "people like me" are the root cause of all societal problems - I'm constantly reading between a bunch of lines and seeing where folks I love are in fact doing terrible things for their families and relationships.
- scarecrowbob 9y ago
  To a great extent, I see people formally arguing well (or, at the very least, trying to signal that they are arguing well) but so many argue for absurd propositions and hellish conclusions. Much of my thought over the last couple of years centers on how much of our rationalist skills are honed around developing resistance strategies. I believe that we have far more and better mental tools at our disposal for telling us that we are being rational than we actually have tools for being rational. Maybe that is, in itself an irrational belief. It's kind of difficult to justify, but it feels correct, so I kneel doan and act as if I believe it, especially with regards to my own thought patterns. At the very least, however, logic and rationality only operate well if we have a common set of quality premises. So even with a good education in rhetoric we often can't get out of our heads enough to look for truth instead of seek the gratification of justifying ourselves. Heck, my MA concentrates on rhetoric and community, and I have a hard time simply being okay when I generally agree with folks who are saying nutty things because of their poor logical skills. And so I can't really be around an environment that foments that kind of casual bad thought.

_jal 9y ago

> If I wouldn't do something in public, I wouldn't post it to social media. Not everyone has that freedom. Gay people in rural Alabama, women in the UAE, undocumented immigrants in Arizona. People fleeing abusive spouses. > Am I the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media? Doubtful, but you are a person who doesn't face serious consequences for existing.

ovao 9y ago
Employers should already know whether an Arizona employee’s status is illegal or not, as this is required by law.
RandallBrown 9y ago
If you're gay in rural Alabama, and you feel uncomfortable posting about it on Facebook because someone you know might find out, you probably aren't super comfortable going to the store or out on a date with your SO either. But you do bring up a good point. My place of privilege in society makes it a lot easier to use Facebook without fearing the same repercussions as other people.
mixmastamyk 9y ago
Or a job where you must present a bland public image.

aylmao 9y ago

+1. I personally think this near-constant bashing of social media is getting ridiculous. These past two weeks have been all-in, article after article, non-stop. Is social media bad? You can definitely have a non-healthy relationship with it. But it didn't "break politics" [1] or "elect Trump" [2]. It was mostly just another vector for advertising. We've known of the privacy issues with Facebook for a while and the whole Cambridge Analytica thing had been in the news before this spree of bad press. We've known Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat are distracting for years. I'm starting to wonder if what's going on here is some sort of war/defence by established media against big tech/social media. We know Murdoch was straight about going to war against Facebook [3] (apparently they lobbied heavily against Google in Europe before too). It wouldn't surprise me if other big-media magnates are in on this too. After all, didn't Facebook cut a bunch of newsfeed traffic to news sites in January? Big media has always been an incredibly lucrative, power-wielding business, because it largely controls the public's opinion. I almost feel like it was bound to happen; big media was bound to claim it's the bastion of truth and scare people out of social media. Now, of course, things aren't black and white. I'm not saying one is good and the other is bad, but that's precisely my point. I see traditional media focusing very heavily this past two weeks on painting social media as bad. Trumps election and the whole "fake news" accusations apparently was amazing for their business [4]. The NYT crossed $1billion in revenue in 2017, with strong growth [5]. Asking people nicely won't get you subscribers, when people are scared because "democracy is at stake" then they pour in. I don't know. Uber literally just killed a woman with a self-driving car: I would've assumed the repercussions of that would be huge and everyone would be talking about the legal aspects of self-driving tech, the future of testing, security, safety, and investigation, etc. But I have seen more articles about Facebook and social media in general in a day than I saw about Uber all of last week. [1]: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/12/15259438/social-media-political-polarization https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/12/15259438/s... [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/20/17138854/cambridge-analytica-facebook-data-trump-campaign-psychographic-microtargeting https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/20/17138854/cambridge-analyt... [3]: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-threatened-mark-zuckerberg-in-2016-with-a-war.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-thre... [4]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/06/is-donald-trump-saving-the-news-media/?utm_term=.5ccc61ae23fc https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/06/is... [5]: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/business/new-york-times-company-earnings.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/business/new-york-times-c...

dgzl 9y ago

For myself, social media (Facebook) makes me upset for several reasons. Besides the usual reasons of seeing disturbing news and advertisements, being manipulated by the system, and the creepy feeling of being digitally analyzed for profit, there exists a more serious problem. I have friends from all over the spectrum, from poor to wealthy, simple to intelligent, young to old. However I find something in almost all of my friend's posts (or reposts) that I highly disagree with (either by fact or opinion), and feel socially compelled not to stand up against their message. I've tried engaging in logical or political conversion with my friends, but it almost always backfires, usually because either a) the conversation is too much for them and they concede, or b) swarms of like-minded bystanders join and dominate via mob-rule. Usually, in neither of these situations does the original poster really consider changing their position. Topics that I come across that make me cringe could be family who perpetuate crystal healing or conspiracy theories, or co-workers who repost anti-Constitution political rhetoric. How is a moderate Libertarian supposed to survive on social media, ignoring nonsense from their friends and family?

logiclion 9y ago
I've also thought this exact thing, the reality is (to me at least) everyone processes information and forms opinions differently. The climate of political discourse, in my opinion, has a large majority in a defensive mindset. What people express as an opinion or 'thought' on social media is currently from the same place I believe. We are so used to being 'sold' a message on these platforms, that we forget the real 'purpose'. Which I believe is, social validation from peers. Not to think the same, but to be reinforced that it's okay to have a opinion and that I can recognize as my own, separate from others. Individuality can be chaotic but there's a good side to it...
hathawsh 9y ago
When I want to reply to posts like that, I ponder until I can think of something to say that is short, simple, and kind. My goal is not to correct them but rather to build a relationship of trust. If they learn to trust me, they are far more likely to join my side on important matters. Also consider that most people don't have your writing skills and will get frustrated when they try to engage in a debate with you in writing. Most people are more comfortable when speaking (especially face to face) rather than writing. That's why most of the real political discussion continues to happen offline, even today.

bitumen 9y ago

Not at all, I’ve always had a very healthy relationship, insofar as I’ve never made an account on Facebook or a Twitter or anything like it. I’ve always been amazed that supposedly smart people don’t understand the simple truth of the internet: once you upload something, it’s online forever. If you’re not 100% sure that what you’re sharing is something you want associated with you until the day you die, don’t share it. As I’m not capable of seeing into the future, the only sane choice is not to share in the first place. Close and meaningful relationships with other people were possible before they were cynically monetized by social media, and they’re still possible without it. When it comes to social media, the only winning move is not to play, and/or be anonymous. The alternative is that some 14 year old can DOXX you, SWAT you, and generally make your life miserable. The alternative is that your boss sees something they don’t like and you lose your job.

zombieprocesses 9y ago

> Am I the only person that has a healthy relationship with social media? You are confusing a propaganda campaign against social media with actual news. Also keep in mind that the author of the Op-Ed was pushing a book he was writing. Billions of people have a healthy relationship with social media. Just like billions of people have a healthy relationship with alcohol, food, working out, tv, sports, cars, etc. But it's funny how every day we are bombarded by the news media on social media ( ironically enough ) about how evil facebook and social media is. OP's post is from November 2016. Why do you think it was posted on HN? Billions of dollars being spent on "cambridge analytics" style firms to put pressure on facebook, google and social media in general. So expect to see a lot of social media bashing as the elites try to reign in social media. That's all it is. Once zuckerburg bends the knee like most social media entities have, the media and the will back off. Just like they did with reddit and google/youtube.

9889095r3jh 9y ago
Why would the elites try to reign in social media? If I were an "elite" I'd want everyone to be on social media, except me. I'd want them revealing all the intimate details of their life, so I can better manipulate them with targted advertising. You don't need a conspiracy theory to explain the recent uptick in articles about social media's negative effects. It's called a news cycle. People write stories about things people are talking about. All year, Social Media has been in the spotlight for privacy blunders and news that nation states spread propoganda with bots. So people like Cal Newport are talking about it. Remember when lead was discovered in Flint, MI's water supply? And then there was an uptick in stories about lead poisoning? That's how news works, for better or worse.
- zombieprocesses 9y ago
  > Why would the elites try to reign in social media? To better control it? > I'd want them revealing all the intimate details of their life, so I can better manipulate them with targted advertising. Yes. As long as they control the targeting and advertising. > You don't need a conspiracy theory to explain the recent uptick in articles about social media's negative effects. It's not a conspiracy. It's reality. It's what happened with every communication medium. Print, Radio, Film, TV and now the internet. To believe otherwise is the real conspiracy. > It's called a news cycle. It doesn't span years. > Remember when lead was discovered in Flint, MI's water supply? And then there was an uptick in stories about lead poisoning? Crazy how quickly that downed down huh? That the elites want to control the means of communication is standard policy for thousands of years. And it spans all nations. The chinese elite, russian elite, saudi elite, the european elites, etc all want to control communication. Our elites aren't different. Societies, like humans, have similar organs.

justjash 9y ago

I use Facebook pretty sparingly with a small group of friends and family so I don't really share too much except for photos. I don't think I post anything bad, but I'd rather not have an employer start making assumptions about me based on a few small bits posted on the internet. I've always felt that the less personal information my employer/co-workers know the better, but I am also one of those people who have a pretty barren cube. The thing that makes me unhappy about Facebook is that it almost seems like too much work to make it worthwhile. Adjusting privacy settings, blocking/limiting certain peoples posts, etc. is just something that I don't like to do. I could care less that someone commented on a video or shared some garbage click bait.

snarfy 9y ago

> I can keep my dad updated to what I've been doing without having to call him. I can't. Some algorithm at Facebook has deemed my posts not worthy enough for his feed. If I could keep up with life events on it I would still use it. But I can't. My news feed looks like chain mail from grandma.

RealityVoid 9y ago
I had the same issue and filtered some content and now I have a decent feed. The thing is, I don't really use the feed, more interesting for me are notifications from groups, the messenger and the instant reconnection potential of FB since near anyone is there.

sergiotapia 9y ago

Regardless, there's very little to gain by having public profiles; and everything to lose. Go anonymous, it worked in the 90s and now it's like we've been spellbound by corporations to go personal.

erik_seaberg 9y ago
Running a panopticon (shadow profiles, evercookies, etc.) has become so cheap that you have to start thinking about opsec to keep an anon account from being linked back to you.

tjr225 9y ago

You can do all of those things without Facebook. I'm not saying one way is right or wrong...I'm just saying. I haven't had a Facebook since 2011 or so and I don't even remember why I got rid of it...but there has been no compelling reason for me to use it since.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

whatyoucantsay 9y ago

Well done! It sounds like you've done well at avoiding the various social media landmines. I suspect most suffer from facebook because of its Skinner Box nature and due to comparing their real selves with their peer's crafted outward-facing personas.

sifoo 9y ago

How can you be so sure that's the case? It's generally very difficult to get a wider perspective from within the fish bowl, you need to step out to feel the difference. What I found, and the reason I ultimately dropped out; is that social networks make me think less of others, because it makes them look stupid and desperate; and I'm pretty sure that goes the other way as well. The corporate incentives to fuck around with our minds for profit in these networks are just too much to deal with; the entire game is rigged, there's no way to win.

drc555 9y ago

Twitter you can carefully curate what you want to see. Facebook , you don't decide to curate what you want to see ( exclude ads )

alexandercrohde 9y ago

Just as a counter to this, consider something like linked in. Suppose you innocently get a new job, and it doesn't work out pretty quickly (e.g. within a month you realize it was a huge mistake). Suppose you also marked this job on your linked in. Now you have to ask yourself if linked In is selling this private information to new employers about this recent bad-role. Also, there are firms that sell info to your employer about you updating your linked in (because it may mean you're looking to quit). So it could affect your career negatively, even if you're super happy and don't see the effects directly.