7 ms·

My theory is that social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in r

by dvt 8y ago

My theory is that social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in reality, we do not. I work remotely and I'm no stranger to being "alone" -- and as an experiment, I did a "social media" detox for about 6 months -- I deleted all social media off my phone (FB, IG, dating apps), I blocked all "social" forums on my computer (HN, reddit, etc.) and even though throughout my entire adult life I've considered myself an introvert (which I probably am), I randomly started to interact with people around me. This was actually pretty surprising. I've never been a "good morning, Joe!" bright-eyed-and-bushy-tailed kind of person, but that's exactly what I became. I started getting better at conversations, more interested in people around me, and just generally in more of a "social vibe." I've always been terrible at remembering names, and instead of brushing it off (after all, who cares about remembering random old guy #7 from coffee shop #4?), I started keeping notes of names and appearance in my phone, so I don't forget who's who. It's actually kind of mind-blowing that my personality underwent such a palpable change. I've since sworn off dating apps and attempting to limit my social media as much as possible. HN and reddit are probably going to get blocked again soon, too.

robbyking 8y ago
A couple times I've caught myself saying "I know a person who..." when what I meant to say was "I follow a person on Instagram who..." It was really eye opening.
- jaden 8y ago
  I've found myself doing the same thing. But you can work next to someone in a cubicle for years and know less about them than you would from subscribing to someone's blog (assuming it's honest). I value in-person interaction, but I've also gotten to feel like I know people with whom I've only interacted with online, via email and MUDing back in the day. How well you really know someone is hard to quantify.
JohnFen 8y ago
> My theory is that social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in reality, we do not. I was having a discussion with my daughter about this just last night, where I made a similar point. I was pointing out how celebrities (particularly, but not solely, movie stars) are always playing a role, even in interviews, etc. When they make a public appearance that isn't overtly as a character, the role they're playing is their "movie star" persona. Unless you are an actual friend of theirs, you don't really know what their true authentic selves are. Social media, it seems to me, has caused everyone to do the same thing. In social media, people tend to be playing a role -- that role being what they view as the best version of themselves. But it's not their true authentic selves any more than with the celebrities. I think this has caused a serious degradation in the social fabric. Before social media, the most common interactions you had were with friends and family, and you were mostly interacting with their authentic selves. After all, nobody really knows you until they've seen you at your worst. Interactions in social media are not like that. You're interactive with people playing parts, and that interaction is no longer genuine human contact. It just has the window-dressing of that. Loneliness and isolation is the logical result of that. It's a bit like replacing most of your food with "dietary fiber" that is made to look and taste like food. It will fill you up and taste good, but in the end you'll still starve to death.
- dvt 8y ago
  > It's a bit like replacing most of your food with "dietary fiber" that is made to look and taste like food. It will fill you up and taste good, but in the end you'll still starve to death. So you're saying social media is kind of like Soylent ;) -- I agree!
  - tejtm 8y ago
    It is made of people
- skookumchuck 8y ago
  > Unless you are an actual friend of theirs, you don't really know what their true authentic selves are. People put on a front for their friends, too. And spouses. Even themselves (who people really are often emerges only when they under extreme stress). Being drunk also strips off the facade to some extent, like being a "mean drunk". I have different faces for the internet, work, friends, lovers, family, etc. We all do.
technofiend 8y ago
>My theory is that social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in reality, we do not. Same with celebrities - some people have trouble disconnecting the fact they're intimately familiar with celebrities (or at least the carefully crafted details they share) and confuse that with actually knowing said celebrities. I think that's what triggers the bizarre behavior of stopping these people and asking for a picture, saying hello, etc. I sort of have the opposite reaction: I'm viscerally uninterested in the lives of celebrities because we're not friends. My wife has finally learned not to tell me Gwen Stefani is pregnant or whatever after I ask "Really? When's the shower? What should we bring?!?"
- numbers 8y ago
  Being uninterested in celebrities has saved me a lot of time. I've sat at a dinner table where my friends chatted about some celebrity getting married or something and at then end of it, there was really no value except that they all connected around some loosely connected gossip about a celebrity. It's some times the juicy stuff that gets people interested at first and then they go down to the point of knowing so much more than is necessary. Another one I find kind of off-putting is how so many of my friends are very well versed in "famous" serial killers and their histories. Why don't people spend as much time learning about things that brought good to the world and not misery/suffering?
  - skookumchuck 8y ago
    Ann Landers once wrote: 1. smart people talk about ideas 2. average people talk about events 3. dumb people talk about other people I sometimes think about that when I engage in gossip, and am annoyed with myself.
    - JohnFen 8y ago
      That's awesome. I'm also reminded of something that Scott Adams wrote in a forward to one of his books. To paraphrase: we're all idiots, even the smartest of us. Not all the time, but given the right situation...
bhntr3 8y ago
I wrote this paper for a class at university in 2002 that relates to some of what you're saying: https://web.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/facetoface.html https://web.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/facetoface.html It's funny to read now because it predated social media for the most part. When I say social networks in the paper it's a theoretical concept which we might call a "social graph" now. I didn't mention it in the paper but that class also introduced me to the concept of Dunbar's number (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number) I guess I'd TLDR it this way now: Internet connections are weaker than in person ones but they probably still take up a slot in your social graph. That graph is probably capped somewhere around 150. So it's not super surprising that when you freed up some space by disconnecting from the internet communities, you felt compelled to fill it back in with people in physical proximity with you. It's a cool personal experiment and it would be interesting if it could be replicated more scientifically.
- dvt 8y ago
  Super cool paper! I think there has been some scientific inquiry into this idea of a "limit" to certain "mental faculties" -- in a graduate seminar I was attending a few years ago, I remember reading about how "attention" is capped to 2-3 points of interest in our visual field. The experiment was done with movies if I remember correctly.
  - bhntr3 8y ago
    Thank you! Yeah, I think Dunbar's number has been proven experimentally. Of course I'm probably guilty of applying it too liberally outside of the limited contexts in which the science has proven it (the pitfall of pop psychology/sociology.) But I agree it's super useful and interesting to think about quantifying and enumerating the limits of human capability where possible. Maybe that's somewhere else we differ from the attitudes of the 18th century romantics from TFA.
chocolatebunny 8y ago
Are you a social media on your phone guy? I mostly have been a social media on my PC person and I think when I'm out I do take note of the people around me but I wouldn't start a random conversation with someone. Mostly because everyone else is on their phone.
- dvt 8y ago
  > Are you a social media on your phone guy? I think that as a single 20- or 30-something, being a social-media-on-your-phone-person is kind of the default. It's a bit awkward at first, but I think most people are pleasantly surprised when you start a conversation with them randomly. I usually start with a compliment ("I like your hat/dress/shoes") or I ask them what they ordered ("that looks/smells great, what is it?"). It's so strange that we've collectively lost this skill in what seems to be less than one generation.
  - jpster 8y ago
    >It's so strange that we've collectively lost this skill in what seems to be less than one generation. Yeah, super weird. Similarly, people talk on the phone less these days and are losing that skill, too. I’ve been increasingly hearing people say this in recent years.
    - Haga 8y ago
      Talks don't give you time to act.
      - kurthr 8y ago
        Are you saying that in the sense of putting on a persona? Just trying to understand...
DoreenMichele 8y ago
This is a fascinating comment. Thank you for leaving it. I'm actually optimistic that online discussion via various avenues has a lot of positive potential, but I really enjoyed your detailed observations.
dorchadas 8y ago
This sounds like an interesting experience. I had my Facebook deactivated for 6 months, and started to sorta-kinda notice the same thing. I really should do it again over the summer and see what happens when I have much more time and freedom.
8bitsrule 8y ago
social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in reality, we do not. Good point. Experience of computing before the time of the the 'net is the main reason I've been little-attracted to the 'promises' of phones, or distance -anything-. I learned from the BBS's and Usenet that long-distance-socializing may feel engaging, but is not a life-long nutritional substitute. Audio and even video may seem like a vast improvement over a crappy 300-baud text-only modem. But it's entirely possible that few people would like Mona Lisa after they saw her in action in a video. The trouble with illusions is: disillusion. Is the article right about "a rising American hope for a limitless self"? It doesn't come in a box.
moneywoes 8y ago
Did you notice any downsides from the experiment?
psyclobe 8y ago
Hmm I tried that too, year since I was on any social media, still just as lonely lol.
solotronics 8y ago
Also along these lines I find its easier to connect with people when you become a "regular". I have made friends at the gym with people who would normally be outside my social circle. I have a neighborhood bar/restaurant I go to at least once a week and make sure to remember people's names who work there and tip well. They remember you and will become friends if you want that. Also, if your dating and bring someone to a restaurant where they all know you and treat you well, it shows good social status!
cco 8y ago
A quick question to maybe further prove your point, how many people, that you only knew through social media, contacted you during your detox to find out if you were ok and what had happened?
agumonkey 8y ago
I believe our brains value physical proximity more than anything else. A bit hyperbolic, and you can sometimes have a super strong connection with someone far away through letter etc, but someone you can sit next too and feel ok/happy/safe will quickly imprint your brain as someone important for you.

by dvt 8y ago

robbyking 8y ago

A couple times I've caught myself saying "I know a person who..." when what I meant to say was "I follow a person on Instagram who..." It was really eye opening.

jaden 8y ago
I've found myself doing the same thing. But you can work next to someone in a cubicle for years and know less about them than you would from subscribing to someone's blog (assuming it's honest). I value in-person interaction, but I've also gotten to feel like I know people with whom I've only interacted with online, via email and MUDing back in the day. How well you really know someone is hard to quantify.

JohnFen 8y ago

> My theory is that social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in reality, we do not. I was having a discussion with my daughter about this just last night, where I made a similar point. I was pointing out how celebrities (particularly, but not solely, movie stars) are always playing a role, even in interviews, etc. When they make a public appearance that isn't overtly as a character, the role they're playing is their "movie star" persona. Unless you are an actual friend of theirs, you don't really know what their true authentic selves are. Social media, it seems to me, has caused everyone to do the same thing. In social media, people tend to be playing a role -- that role being what they view as the best version of themselves. But it's not their true authentic selves any more than with the celebrities. I think this has caused a serious degradation in the social fabric. Before social media, the most common interactions you had were with friends and family, and you were mostly interacting with their authentic selves. After all, nobody really knows you until they've seen you at your worst. Interactions in social media are not like that. You're interactive with people playing parts, and that interaction is no longer genuine human contact. It just has the window-dressing of that. Loneliness and isolation is the logical result of that. It's a bit like replacing most of your food with "dietary fiber" that is made to look and taste like food. It will fill you up and taste good, but in the end you'll still starve to death.

dvt 8y ago
> It's a bit like replacing most of your food with "dietary fiber" that is made to look and taste like food. It will fill you up and taste good, but in the end you'll still starve to death. So you're saying social media is kind of like Soylent ;) -- I agree!
- tejtm 8y ago
  It is made of people
skookumchuck 8y ago
> Unless you are an actual friend of theirs, you don't really know what their true authentic selves are. People put on a front for their friends, too. And spouses. Even themselves (who people really are often emerges only when they under extreme stress). Being drunk also strips off the facade to some extent, like being a "mean drunk". I have different faces for the internet, work, friends, lovers, family, etc. We all do.

technofiend 8y ago

>My theory is that social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in reality, we do not. Same with celebrities - some people have trouble disconnecting the fact they're intimately familiar with celebrities (or at least the carefully crafted details they share) and confuse that with actually knowing said celebrities. I think that's what triggers the bizarre behavior of stopping these people and asking for a picture, saying hello, etc. I sort of have the opposite reaction: I'm viscerally uninterested in the lives of celebrities because we're not friends. My wife has finally learned not to tell me Gwen Stefani is pregnant or whatever after I ask "Really? When's the shower? What should we bring?!?"

numbers 8y ago
Being uninterested in celebrities has saved me a lot of time. I've sat at a dinner table where my friends chatted about some celebrity getting married or something and at then end of it, there was really no value except that they all connected around some loosely connected gossip about a celebrity. It's some times the juicy stuff that gets people interested at first and then they go down to the point of knowing so much more than is necessary. Another one I find kind of off-putting is how so many of my friends are very well versed in "famous" serial killers and their histories. Why don't people spend as much time learning about things that brought good to the world and not misery/suffering?
- skookumchuck 8y ago
  Ann Landers once wrote: 1. smart people talk about ideas 2. average people talk about events 3. dumb people talk about other people I sometimes think about that when I engage in gossip, and am annoyed with myself.
  - JohnFen 8y ago
    That's awesome. I'm also reminded of something that Scott Adams wrote in a forward to one of his books. To paraphrase: we're all idiots, even the smartest of us. Not all the time, but given the right situation...

bhntr3 8y ago

I wrote this paper for a class at university in 2002 that relates to some of what you're saying: https://web.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/facetoface.html https://web.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/facetoface.html It's funny to read now because it predated social media for the most part. When I say social networks in the paper it's a theoretical concept which we might call a "social graph" now. I didn't mention it in the paper but that class also introduced me to the concept of Dunbar's number (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number) I guess I'd TLDR it this way now: Internet connections are weaker than in person ones but they probably still take up a slot in your social graph. That graph is probably capped somewhere around 150. So it's not super surprising that when you freed up some space by disconnecting from the internet communities, you felt compelled to fill it back in with people in physical proximity with you. It's a cool personal experiment and it would be interesting if it could be replicated more scientifically.

dvt 8y ago
Super cool paper! I think there has been some scientific inquiry into this idea of a "limit" to certain "mental faculties" -- in a graduate seminar I was attending a few years ago, I remember reading about how "attention" is capped to 2-3 points of interest in our visual field. The experiment was done with movies if I remember correctly.
- bhntr3 8y ago
  Thank you! Yeah, I think Dunbar's number has been proven experimentally. Of course I'm probably guilty of applying it too liberally outside of the limited contexts in which the science has proven it (the pitfall of pop psychology/sociology.) But I agree it's super useful and interesting to think about quantifying and enumerating the limits of human capability where possible. Maybe that's somewhere else we differ from the attitudes of the 18th century romantics from TFA.

chocolatebunny 8y ago

Are you a social media on your phone guy? I mostly have been a social media on my PC person and I think when I'm out I do take note of the people around me but I wouldn't start a random conversation with someone. Mostly because everyone else is on their phone.

dvt 8y ago
> Are you a social media on your phone guy? I think that as a single 20- or 30-something, being a social-media-on-your-phone-person is kind of the default. It's a bit awkward at first, but I think most people are pleasantly surprised when you start a conversation with them randomly. I usually start with a compliment ("I like your hat/dress/shoes") or I ask them what they ordered ("that looks/smells great, what is it?"). It's so strange that we've collectively lost this skill in what seems to be less than one generation.
- jpster 8y ago
  >It's so strange that we've collectively lost this skill in what seems to be less than one generation. Yeah, super weird. Similarly, people talk on the phone less these days and are losing that skill, too. I’ve been increasingly hearing people say this in recent years.
  - Haga 8y ago
    Talks don't give you time to act.
    - kurthr 8y ago
      Are you saying that in the sense of putting on a persona? Just trying to understand...

DoreenMichele 8y ago

This is a fascinating comment. Thank you for leaving it. I'm actually optimistic that online discussion via various avenues has a lot of positive potential, but I really enjoyed your detailed observations.

dorchadas 8y ago

This sounds like an interesting experience. I had my Facebook deactivated for 6 months, and started to sorta-kinda notice the same thing. I really should do it again over the summer and see what happens when I have much more time and freedom.

8bitsrule 8y ago

social media, the internet, and these manufactured communities trick our brains into feeling like we belong to actual communities -- when in reality, we do not. Good point. Experience of computing before the time of the the 'net is the main reason I've been little-attracted to the 'promises' of phones, or distance -anything-. I learned from the BBS's and Usenet that long-distance-socializing may feel engaging, but is not a life-long nutritional substitute. Audio and even video may seem like a vast improvement over a crappy 300-baud text-only modem. But it's entirely possible that few people would like Mona Lisa after they saw her in action in a video. The trouble with illusions is: disillusion. Is the article right about "a rising American hope for a limitless self"? It doesn't come in a box.

moneywoes 8y ago

Did you notice any downsides from the experiment?

psyclobe 8y ago

Hmm I tried that too, year since I was on any social media, still just as lonely lol.

solotronics 8y ago

Also along these lines I find its easier to connect with people when you become a "regular". I have made friends at the gym with people who would normally be outside my social circle. I have a neighborhood bar/restaurant I go to at least once a week and make sure to remember people's names who work there and tip well. They remember you and will become friends if you want that. Also, if your dating and bring someone to a restaurant where they all know you and treat you well, it shows good social status!

cco 8y ago

A quick question to maybe further prove your point, how many people, that you only knew through social media, contacted you during your detox to find out if you were ok and what had happened?

agumonkey 8y ago

I believe our brains value physical proximity more than anything else. A bit hyperbolic, and you can sometimes have a super strong connection with someone far away through letter etc, but someone you can sit next too and feel ok/happy/safe will quickly imprint your brain as someone important for you.