7 ms·

Americans Agree: Social Media Is Divisive (But We Keep Using It)

54 points by petethomas 8y ago

everdev 8y ago
Most of my friends (~30s-40s) openly talk about how negative their experience was with social media (interrupting family time, seeking approval / likes, losing an hour or more to endless scrolling, having to have an opinion on everything, stirring conflict between friends and family, etc.) and how they've deleted their accounts. It was useful and novel 10+ years ago, but for traditional uses like sharing photos and messaging, SMS or Google Photos is easy enough these days. It's been widely discussed that people who consume less news are generally happier and I'm sure that's the same with social media too.
- LUmBULtERA 8y ago
  I'm mid-30s and deleted my Facebook a couple years ago. Although most of my friends and family sympathize with my reasoning, very few have followed in my footsteps. I find that mildly depression.
- AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
  I'm trying to stay away from the social networks, but somehow our local running club decided that Facebook is the best way to communicate with external world.
  - prolepunk 8y ago
    I haven't yet deleted facebook, but I only access it from home computer once or twice a week, and as a result I miss some events because my friends keep sending me messages via facebook messanger even though I have post at the top of my page saying I'm not actively use facebook and ask them to use literally any other messaging platforms.
  - everdev 8y ago
    True, that's one complaint I still hear about quitting is that a lot of events and groups are still managed on Facebook.
- ravenstine 8y ago
  I think most or at least a significant portion of people will remain news junkies, but a lot of people are waking up to what "news" really is after witnessing how much of it is actually "breaking news" that's hardly fact-checked or not at all. People are believing journalists less and less, yet journalists on the whole don't seem bothered enough to take action to correct their image. Having worked with journalists, a lot of them are concerned with their image; I'm just not sure that an appreciable amount will ever actually try to do something about it. Even taking an extended break from Facebook can be beneficial. Back in 2015, I took a 9 month break and came back to it with a different set of eyes. It inoculated me to the need to constantly check my feed. I kept my profile for a long time because it served as a contact list, but the other day I decided to up and delete it. I couldn't be happier. Everyone who actually mattered is in my email contacts. There are actually people claiming "email is out", yet there's nobody I know who doesn't have an email or who doesn't respond to them. If you've got someone's email and phone number, the chances that you'll lose contact with them for good is very small. Just have the courage to reach out to them every once in a while rather than wait for others to post a photo of their dinner plate so you can "like" it to let them know you still exist. People feel special when others reach out to them, even if it's just to see how they're doing, and I know I would rather get a text from one person saying "s'up?" than a bunch of "likes". I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Places like HN, Reddit, Discord, etc., are all far more social than what people dub "social media".
  - beat 8y ago
    I walked by a tv at work, and CNN was scrolling "BREAKING NEWS", with Trump talking, and I thought "What has he broken this time?" But I don't think the current distrust of media is about the inaccuracy of journalism. "Breaking news" isn't fully investigated at the moment because it's breaking news. We'll learn why the plane crashed later; we don't need to wait until the root cause analysis is done to tell people a plane crashed. Rather, the distrust of media is being fueled by the tendency to live in online echo chambers that reinforce preconceptions and ideology. When news happens that doesn't fit our echo-chamber worldview, it gets dubbed "fake news". And, since none of us are always right, sooner or later news is going to happen that contradicts our beliefs. We can adjust our beliefs about the message, or we can adjust our beliefs about the messenger. People choose the latter, because they're self-centered fools. Yes, even us. Clever politicians have really learned to play this. "You can't trust the media, but you can trust me" turns into a systematic enforcement of blind loyalty. This isn't about any one figure - I see it happening on both the right and the left. Reality gets rejected by command of King Echo.
3xblah 8y ago
Imagine if in 1993 someone proposed that the majority of web usage, i.e. the hours spent, would occur on one website. Imagine no need for email; all communications could be published on and retrieved from a single website. All eyeballs on the same website, not simply as a starting point or "portal", but as a destination. Even more, the website produces no content. It is all contributed by users.
- asd 8y ago
  Sounds like a BBS.
  - beat 8y ago
    I was actively involved in the BBS scene back in the mid-1990s. It had most of the same problems Facebook/Twitter does today - and the same attractions, albeit not as refined. Unfortunately, it's taken me 25 years to recognize the toxicity to the point of quitting.
    - chiefalchemist 8y ago
      The tipping point was the mobile device. Now instead of getting an (unhealthy) dose of confirmation bias once per morning and/or once per evening, now you get it all day, every day. The more people confirm their bias the less likely objectivity is to "leak" into their echo chamber.
      - beat 8y ago
        I think "objectivity" is bullshit, but echo chambers and confirmation bias are a big problem. Then again, politics aren't the only problem with online addiction - they're not even the biggest problem, imho. I do think your point about mobile devices is spot-on, though. I was asking myself why I don't mind HN while I avoid FB and Twitter, and the fact that I don't use it on my phone may be a big part of that. Cal Newport gives this advice as part of Digital Minimalism as well... restrict your social media to real computers only, and absolutely avoid any phone apps.
beat 8y ago
In March, I quit using Facebook cold turkey, for a variety of reasons. During March, I read six books. I normally read about two books a month. Was I really reading four books a month worth of Facebook? Quite possibly. I recommend reading Cal Newport's Digital Minimalism for a solid basis on how to deal with social media - where it's necessary, where it's okay, and where it's actively harmful. I also recommend reading Gary Rogowski's Handmade: Creative Focus in an Age of Distraction, which isn't so much about getting off social media as what your life can look like when you're not on it in the first place.
- pjc50 8y ago
  I'm fairly sure I've written a book's worth of HN comments. I've seriously considered trying to extract the top-rated ones and weave them into a book.
  - beat 8y ago
    I've turned Facebook posts and comments into blog entries on Medium. There's much to be said for the low-key, low pressure feel of such writing. Plus, I'm really inspired by responding to the thoughts of others (or having my own perceptions questioned and altered). That said, it's such an attention suck that it's absolutely not worth it for me. I'm finding I'm happier when I stay off. And I'm just wrapping up a two-year project (producing a concept album!), so I've decided to not take on any of the projects waiting in the wings, and just try living for a bit without most social media or any big projects, and see what that's like.
  - chriswarbo 8y ago
    Many of my blog posts started out as HN comments. I find it stimulates me to write things in a way that staring at an empty Emacs buffer doesn't.
Aloha 8y ago
I have Facebook and Twitter - I dont really use either, I might spend an hour a week interacting with facebook, and an hour a quarter with Twitter. Twitter is full of angry people trying to one up each other, and FB is full of falsehoods circulated like chain letters. Both have little use for me.
Nasrudith 8y ago
Personally I think social media is being misblamed as an easy scapegoat. It does have its problems with privacy, mob mentalities, and impulse control but it didn't start the fire or even accelerate it much - it is a preexisting condition worsening over time period. Before the misinformation there were chain letters and plenty of stupid moral panics. Division has always been with us - it just makes it more obvious.
- beat 8y ago
  I think social media is a tipping point for a lot of basic human behavior - a threshold has been crossed. Sure, it's just amplifying normal human behavior, but so does cocaine. (Remember the wise words of Bill Cosby here... he asked someone to explain the appeal of cocaine, and they said "It intensifies your personality". He said "But what if you're an asshole?")
- apatters 8y ago
  Twitter and Facebook in 2019 are both dumpster fires, but they aren't the totality of social media. Before (and concurrent to) them we had Friendster, Myspace, Orkut, and a plethora of hybrid services that have social networking features. Facebook and Twitter (1) optimize for mobile, where expressing complex thought is difficult, (2) perform relentless A/B engagement testing seemingly without accounting for the fact that people engage with things that make them unhappy, and (3) have a huge news/media presence. I think all these elements and probably more contributed to the cancer these services have become.
duxup 8y ago
Humans are social animals. It's fun to connect with people about positive things. There was always some discussion about a "dislike" button on Facebook. That always confused me. I have NO INTEREST in what people don't like. I want to hear about what they're doing that is positive.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  The problem is that the kind of game-ified simulacrum of socialization that social media often is doesn't promote connecting with people at all. Indeed, it seems to me that very few things in contemporary society do.
  - duxup 8y ago
    I guess it depends on what kind of socialization we're talking about. Just surfing someone else's photos is enough for me as far as what social media provides. That's not the start and end of all socialization, but it is nice.
chiefalchemist 8y ago
The current state of social media is a symptom; it's a mirror. To blame the mirror for who and what is staring into it doesn't help solve the problem(s). True, social media (as it stands today) is an enabler. It helps the symptoms (e.g., confirmation bias) exists and persist, but ultimately it's still not the tools' fault. In the USA, I'd be more ready to place more blame on the binary political parties, as well as the mainstream media. The internet will eventually greatly reduce the power and influence of all three of these. What we're witnessing now first-hand is these three power-holders collapsing and screaming "But...But...we're still very relevant. Look! Look!! You need us to protect you from 'them'" (with 'them' being one of the other power-losing enties). All three have become terribly efficient at using hype, hyperbole and divisiveness as means to "proving" they still matter. For more info on these concepts see "The Influential Mind" by Tali Sharot. https://www.amazon.com/Influential-Mind-Reveals-Change-Others/dp/1627792651 https://www.amazon.com/Influential-Mind-Reveals-Change-Other... While she doesn't do a direct take down of media, social media and politics, it doesn't take a genius to read between the lines a bit and extrapolate her science onto the current state of things.
- sandworm101 8y ago
  >> place more blame on the binary political parties, as well as the mainstream media. Those are also just different mirrors. Social media is a greater number of faster-responding mirrors, but the concept remains the same: the content reflects the desires of the audience. I place all the blame on individual users. They are the ones that must alter their behavior. Each individual must come to understand how they manipulate the content they see. I don't blame talk radio and facebook for turning my aunt into a crazed right-wing conspiracy theorist (the really bad type. She believed pizzagate, probably still does.) She has done this to herself and only she can dig herself out of the hole. The family can support her, as one would any other addict, but the individual must want to change.
  - chiefalchemist 8y ago
    Agreed. User need to be more responsible. 100%! That said, that should not let leadership off the hook. For those three mentioned leaders to abuse their power __at all costs__ in order to maintain their power can not and should not be discounted.
papermill 8y ago
Americans agree politics is divisive. Americans agree news is divisive. Americans agree sports is divisive. But we all still consume it. I don't get the point of the article. People are divisive. Water is wet and anything having to do with people is divisive. How many of these "social media bad" articles are we really going to get from the news industry? It's getting to be annoying, boring and exhausting. If social media is so bad, why is the WSJ and the rest of the media trying to force their way onto social media platforms? If these journalists are right and social media is so bad, why are journalists so prominent on twitter and much of social media? If you want divisive, go check out the WSJ and NYTimes comment sections. Yet a lot of people consume products from WSJ and NYTimes. What's the answer? No media altogether or force people to think alike?
- tsukurimashou 8y ago
  >No media altogether or force people to think alike? I'd say media already tries (and succeeds for a lot of things) to make people think alike
- moorhosj 8y ago
  ==How many of these "social media bad" articles are we really going to get from the news industry?== How many dieting articles are written by the news industry? ==If these journalists are right and social media is so bad, why are journalists so prominent on twitter and much of social media?== Because they have to be to make money, that doesn't help answer the question of whether or not they are bad themselves. There is a difference between a corporation (profit-seeking entity) and an individual (happiness-seeking entity). It makes sense that they may have different views on what is good/bad.
  - malvosenior 8y ago
    If you look at journalists’ social media accounts you’ll see that it’s not about making money but it is about in-group signaling and being extremely obnoxious. They tend to tweet a lot and engage in the worst behavior. Blue check mark Twitter is the most toxic Twitter.
ixtli 8y ago
Its not social media! Social media has a lot of issues that really need to be discussed in public but technology has no morals. Facebook dot com isn't divisive: its USERS are. Before social media you didn't have a deep view into their neighbors thoughts and feelings. Now, we have a slightly deeper one and (shock and surprise!) we find out that a social taboo on discussing serious issues in casual company didn't lead to those issues being resolved, we simply ignored them while people none of us like made all the decisions for us.
- chriswarbo 8y ago
  You're ignoring the fact that "Facebook dot com" isn't just used by those with a Facebook account; it is also used by Facebook-the-company and its customers (advertisers, propagandists, etc.) against those with a Facebook account (in order to extract revenue). This leads to things like "optimising for engagement", and outrage turns out to be highly engaging and easy to produce.
  - ixtli 8y ago
    I dunno I think my comment was inclusive of the notion that facebook profits off of (i.e.: its users include) propagandists and other bad actors.
tmp09211 8y ago
Are there any "think before you speak" browser extensions out there? Thinking of doing a hackathon project that analyzes a comment in a comment box before you post...
- neom 8y ago
  I need this for emails as well. Clippy: Looks like you're trying to send an angry email, would you like to save it as a draft and read it when you're thinking straight?
  - tmp09211 8y ago
    Yes, for sure for work...would let you know the tone of your email...angry/passive aggressive/etc etc
nemild 8y ago
I loved Paul Buccheit’s (of YC) quote on social media: “[Twitter] is like a game where you get 1 point for being fair and thoughtful and 1000 points for character assassination.” https://mobile.twitter.com/paultoo/status/1100144882872532992 https://mobile.twitter.com/paultoo/status/110014488287253299... (He said it about Twitter, but I think the spirit was about social media generally) Paul also helped brainstorm “Don’t Be Evil” at an early Google. Personally, I don’t blame the media alone (as some in this thread do). All of us are a product of the incentives we face, and feed algorithms play a huge role (including for the journalists at media outlets). And as always, I will shill my media literacy guide (there’s also a version for software engineers): https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/README.... https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/software-engineers-media-guide.md https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/softwar...

54 points by petethomas 8y ago

Most of my friends (~30s-40s) openly talk about how negative their experience was with social media (interrupting family time, seeking approval / likes, losing an hour or more to endless scrolling, having to have an opinion on everything, stirring conflict between friends and family, etc.) and how they've deleted their accounts. It was useful and novel 10+ years ago, but for traditional uses like sharing photos and messaging, SMS or Google Photos is easy enough these days. It's been widely discussed that people who consume less news are generally happier and I'm sure that's the same with social media too.

LUmBULtERA 8y ago
I'm mid-30s and deleted my Facebook a couple years ago. Although most of my friends and family sympathize with my reasoning, very few have followed in my footsteps. I find that mildly depression.
AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
I'm trying to stay away from the social networks, but somehow our local running club decided that Facebook is the best way to communicate with external world.
- prolepunk 8y ago
  I haven't yet deleted facebook, but I only access it from home computer once or twice a week, and as a result I miss some events because my friends keep sending me messages via facebook messanger even though I have post at the top of my page saying I'm not actively use facebook and ask them to use literally any other messaging platforms.
- everdev 8y ago
  True, that's one complaint I still hear about quitting is that a lot of events and groups are still managed on Facebook.
ravenstine 8y ago
I think most or at least a significant portion of people will remain news junkies, but a lot of people are waking up to what "news" really is after witnessing how much of it is actually "breaking news" that's hardly fact-checked or not at all. People are believing journalists less and less, yet journalists on the whole don't seem bothered enough to take action to correct their image. Having worked with journalists, a lot of them are concerned with their image; I'm just not sure that an appreciable amount will ever actually try to do something about it. Even taking an extended break from Facebook can be beneficial. Back in 2015, I took a 9 month break and came back to it with a different set of eyes. It inoculated me to the need to constantly check my feed. I kept my profile for a long time because it served as a contact list, but the other day I decided to up and delete it. I couldn't be happier. Everyone who actually mattered is in my email contacts. There are actually people claiming "email is out", yet there's nobody I know who doesn't have an email or who doesn't respond to them. If you've got someone's email and phone number, the chances that you'll lose contact with them for good is very small. Just have the courage to reach out to them every once in a while rather than wait for others to post a photo of their dinner plate so you can "like" it to let them know you still exist. People feel special when others reach out to them, even if it's just to see how they're doing, and I know I would rather get a text from one person saying "s'up?" than a bunch of "likes". I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Places like HN, Reddit, Discord, etc., are all far more social than what people dub "social media".
- beat 8y ago
  I walked by a tv at work, and CNN was scrolling "BREAKING NEWS", with Trump talking, and I thought "What has he broken this time?" But I don't think the current distrust of media is about the inaccuracy of journalism. "Breaking news" isn't fully investigated at the moment because it's breaking news. We'll learn why the plane crashed later; we don't need to wait until the root cause analysis is done to tell people a plane crashed. Rather, the distrust of media is being fueled by the tendency to live in online echo chambers that reinforce preconceptions and ideology. When news happens that doesn't fit our echo-chamber worldview, it gets dubbed "fake news". And, since none of us are always right, sooner or later news is going to happen that contradicts our beliefs. We can adjust our beliefs about the message, or we can adjust our beliefs about the messenger. People choose the latter, because they're self-centered fools. Yes, even us. Clever politicians have really learned to play this. "You can't trust the media, but you can trust me" turns into a systematic enforcement of blind loyalty. This isn't about any one figure - I see it happening on both the right and the left. Reality gets rejected by command of King Echo.

3xblah 8y ago

Imagine if in 1993 someone proposed that the majority of web usage, i.e. the hours spent, would occur on one website. Imagine no need for email; all communications could be published on and retrieved from a single website. All eyeballs on the same website, not simply as a starting point or "portal", but as a destination. Even more, the website produces no content. It is all contributed by users.

asd 8y ago
Sounds like a BBS.
- beat 8y ago
  I was actively involved in the BBS scene back in the mid-1990s. It had most of the same problems Facebook/Twitter does today - and the same attractions, albeit not as refined. Unfortunately, it's taken me 25 years to recognize the toxicity to the point of quitting.
  - chiefalchemist 8y ago
    The tipping point was the mobile device. Now instead of getting an (unhealthy) dose of confirmation bias once per morning and/or once per evening, now you get it all day, every day. The more people confirm their bias the less likely objectivity is to "leak" into their echo chamber.
    - beat 8y ago
      I think "objectivity" is bullshit, but echo chambers and confirmation bias are a big problem. Then again, politics aren't the only problem with online addiction - they're not even the biggest problem, imho. I do think your point about mobile devices is spot-on, though. I was asking myself why I don't mind HN while I avoid FB and Twitter, and the fact that I don't use it on my phone may be a big part of that. Cal Newport gives this advice as part of Digital Minimalism as well... restrict your social media to real computers only, and absolutely avoid any phone apps.

beat 8y ago

In March, I quit using Facebook cold turkey, for a variety of reasons. During March, I read six books. I normally read about two books a month. Was I really reading four books a month worth of Facebook? Quite possibly. I recommend reading Cal Newport's Digital Minimalism for a solid basis on how to deal with social media - where it's necessary, where it's okay, and where it's actively harmful. I also recommend reading Gary Rogowski's Handmade: Creative Focus in an Age of Distraction, which isn't so much about getting off social media as what your life can look like when you're not on it in the first place.

pjc50 8y ago
I'm fairly sure I've written a book's worth of HN comments. I've seriously considered trying to extract the top-rated ones and weave them into a book.
- beat 8y ago
  I've turned Facebook posts and comments into blog entries on Medium. There's much to be said for the low-key, low pressure feel of such writing. Plus, I'm really inspired by responding to the thoughts of others (or having my own perceptions questioned and altered). That said, it's such an attention suck that it's absolutely not worth it for me. I'm finding I'm happier when I stay off. And I'm just wrapping up a two-year project (producing a concept album!), so I've decided to not take on any of the projects waiting in the wings, and just try living for a bit without most social media or any big projects, and see what that's like.
- chriswarbo 8y ago
  Many of my blog posts started out as HN comments. I find it stimulates me to write things in a way that staring at an empty Emacs buffer doesn't.

Aloha 8y ago

I have Facebook and Twitter - I dont really use either, I might spend an hour a week interacting with facebook, and an hour a quarter with Twitter. Twitter is full of angry people trying to one up each other, and FB is full of falsehoods circulated like chain letters. Both have little use for me.

Nasrudith 8y ago

Personally I think social media is being misblamed as an easy scapegoat. It does have its problems with privacy, mob mentalities, and impulse control but it didn't start the fire or even accelerate it much - it is a preexisting condition worsening over time period. Before the misinformation there were chain letters and plenty of stupid moral panics. Division has always been with us - it just makes it more obvious.

beat 8y ago
I think social media is a tipping point for a lot of basic human behavior - a threshold has been crossed. Sure, it's just amplifying normal human behavior, but so does cocaine. (Remember the wise words of Bill Cosby here... he asked someone to explain the appeal of cocaine, and they said "It intensifies your personality". He said "But what if you're an asshole?")
apatters 8y ago
Twitter and Facebook in 2019 are both dumpster fires, but they aren't the totality of social media. Before (and concurrent to) them we had Friendster, Myspace, Orkut, and a plethora of hybrid services that have social networking features. Facebook and Twitter (1) optimize for mobile, where expressing complex thought is difficult, (2) perform relentless A/B engagement testing seemingly without accounting for the fact that people engage with things that make them unhappy, and (3) have a huge news/media presence. I think all these elements and probably more contributed to the cancer these services have become.

duxup 8y ago

Humans are social animals. It's fun to connect with people about positive things. There was always some discussion about a "dislike" button on Facebook. That always confused me. I have NO INTEREST in what people don't like. I want to hear about what they're doing that is positive.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
The problem is that the kind of game-ified simulacrum of socialization that social media often is doesn't promote connecting with people at all. Indeed, it seems to me that very few things in contemporary society do.
- duxup 8y ago
  I guess it depends on what kind of socialization we're talking about. Just surfing someone else's photos is enough for me as far as what social media provides. That's not the start and end of all socialization, but it is nice.

chiefalchemist 8y ago

The current state of social media is a symptom; it's a mirror. To blame the mirror for who and what is staring into it doesn't help solve the problem(s). True, social media (as it stands today) is an enabler. It helps the symptoms (e.g., confirmation bias) exists and persist, but ultimately it's still not the tools' fault. In the USA, I'd be more ready to place more blame on the binary political parties, as well as the mainstream media. The internet will eventually greatly reduce the power and influence of all three of these. What we're witnessing now first-hand is these three power-holders collapsing and screaming "But...But...we're still very relevant. Look! Look!! You need us to protect you from 'them'" (with 'them' being one of the other power-losing enties). All three have become terribly efficient at using hype, hyperbole and divisiveness as means to "proving" they still matter. For more info on these concepts see "The Influential Mind" by Tali Sharot. https://www.amazon.com/Influential-Mind-Reveals-Change-Others/dp/1627792651 https://www.amazon.com/Influential-Mind-Reveals-Change-Other... While she doesn't do a direct take down of media, social media and politics, it doesn't take a genius to read between the lines a bit and extrapolate her science onto the current state of things.

sandworm101 8y ago
>> place more blame on the binary political parties, as well as the mainstream media. Those are also just different mirrors. Social media is a greater number of faster-responding mirrors, but the concept remains the same: the content reflects the desires of the audience. I place all the blame on individual users. They are the ones that must alter their behavior. Each individual must come to understand how they manipulate the content they see. I don't blame talk radio and facebook for turning my aunt into a crazed right-wing conspiracy theorist (the really bad type. She believed pizzagate, probably still does.) She has done this to herself and only she can dig herself out of the hole. The family can support her, as one would any other addict, but the individual must want to change.
- chiefalchemist 8y ago
  Agreed. User need to be more responsible. 100%! That said, that should not let leadership off the hook. For those three mentioned leaders to abuse their power __at all costs__ in order to maintain their power can not and should not be discounted.

papermill 8y ago

Americans agree politics is divisive. Americans agree news is divisive. Americans agree sports is divisive. But we all still consume it. I don't get the point of the article. People are divisive. Water is wet and anything having to do with people is divisive. How many of these "social media bad" articles are we really going to get from the news industry? It's getting to be annoying, boring and exhausting. If social media is so bad, why is the WSJ and the rest of the media trying to force their way onto social media platforms? If these journalists are right and social media is so bad, why are journalists so prominent on twitter and much of social media? If you want divisive, go check out the WSJ and NYTimes comment sections. Yet a lot of people consume products from WSJ and NYTimes. What's the answer? No media altogether or force people to think alike?

tsukurimashou 8y ago
>No media altogether or force people to think alike? I'd say media already tries (and succeeds for a lot of things) to make people think alike
moorhosj 8y ago
==How many of these "social media bad" articles are we really going to get from the news industry?== How many dieting articles are written by the news industry? ==If these journalists are right and social media is so bad, why are journalists so prominent on twitter and much of social media?== Because they have to be to make money, that doesn't help answer the question of whether or not they are bad themselves. There is a difference between a corporation (profit-seeking entity) and an individual (happiness-seeking entity). It makes sense that they may have different views on what is good/bad.
- malvosenior 8y ago
  If you look at journalists’ social media accounts you’ll see that it’s not about making money but it is about in-group signaling and being extremely obnoxious. They tend to tweet a lot and engage in the worst behavior. Blue check mark Twitter is the most toxic Twitter.

ixtli 8y ago

Its not social media! Social media has a lot of issues that really need to be discussed in public but technology has no morals. Facebook dot com isn't divisive: its USERS are. Before social media you didn't have a deep view into their neighbors thoughts and feelings. Now, we have a slightly deeper one and (shock and surprise!) we find out that a social taboo on discussing serious issues in casual company didn't lead to those issues being resolved, we simply ignored them while people none of us like made all the decisions for us.

chriswarbo 8y ago
You're ignoring the fact that "Facebook dot com" isn't just used by those with a Facebook account; it is also used by Facebook-the-company and its customers (advertisers, propagandists, etc.) against those with a Facebook account (in order to extract revenue). This leads to things like "optimising for engagement", and outrage turns out to be highly engaging and easy to produce.
- ixtli 8y ago
  I dunno I think my comment was inclusive of the notion that facebook profits off of (i.e.: its users include) propagandists and other bad actors.

tmp09211 8y ago

Are there any "think before you speak" browser extensions out there? Thinking of doing a hackathon project that analyzes a comment in a comment box before you post...

neom 8y ago
I need this for emails as well. Clippy: Looks like you're trying to send an angry email, would you like to save it as a draft and read it when you're thinking straight?
- tmp09211 8y ago
  Yes, for sure for work...would let you know the tone of your email...angry/passive aggressive/etc etc

nemild 8y ago

I loved Paul Buccheit’s (of YC) quote on social media: “[Twitter] is like a game where you get 1 point for being fair and thoughtful and 1000 points for character assassination.” https://mobile.twitter.com/paultoo/status/1100144882872532992 https://mobile.twitter.com/paultoo/status/110014488287253299... (He said it about Twitter, but I think the spirit was about social media generally) Paul also helped brainstorm “Don’t Be Evil” at an early Google. Personally, I don’t blame the media alone (as some in this thread do). All of us are a product of the incentives we face, and feed algorithms play a huge role (including for the journalists at media outlets). And as always, I will shill my media literacy guide (there’s also a version for software engineers): https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/README.... https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/software-engineers-media-guide.md https://github.com/nemild/hack-the-media/blob/master/softwar...