Social Media Discussion

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 30 Responses
  • Bluejam1
  • monNom2

    "Once a government is committed to silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens creating a country where everyone lives in fear.” -Harry S. Truman

  • mort_17

    I have a friend who, unlike me, doesn’t think Trump did a bad job, is strongly anti-vaccine, thinks spinach can cure cancer and supports every conspiracy theory going. He’s a good person. But for whatever reasons, that’s his leaning.

    When I used to have a Facebook account, I felt the need to push back on his posts and opinions, especially when they got a tonne of likes and responses. I generally tried not to get involved but was triggered enough to avoid him in real life.

    Since not having a Facebook account (a few years now), we meet up, speak on the phone and I enjoy his company. These things come up sometimes but it’s a much more nuanced discussion and I tend to respond more compassionately. I also steer the conversation more towards topics where we have common interest. Music, movies etc.

    My point is, social media, forums, instant messaging, news feed algorithms, etc. set us up for polarisation. We have huge capacity for empathy, understanding and connectedness but these platforms, often take us in the opposite direction.

    For me, largely avoiding them works.

    • Agreed. I don’t mind the platforms themselves as much as the algorithms that trap people in feed tunnels w/o their real understanding that tunnel is a sewerinstrmntl
    • Nice analogy. I think there's also a more basic issue of not being able to convey nuance with text on a screen. Emojis are a poor substitute for body language.mort_
    • So much is communicated non-verbally in person.mort_
    • good point mort!renderedred
    • I'm worried that my friends still believe that Trump said to drink bleach to fight the corona virus and other hoaxes. This is not good.stewart
    • He suggested injecting it, right?

      https://www.snopes.c…
      mort_
    • My neighbor said “no matter how it works out, I hope it’s for the better.”jtb26
    • Amen @mort_. No one talks about the weather on social(s).

      It's all polarizing like you said, especially now in 2021.
      ideaist
    • @stewart, why? Those people are mocking the shit response, science denial and utter stupidity of the president. They aren't the problem.monospaced
    • Completely agree. Thanks for being smart, sane, and compassionate in an online world that's rarely any of those things.MondoMorphic
    • This is correct but at some point you got to judge someone's intelligence if they believe whatever graphic comes across their screen but despise the NY Times.omahadesigns
    • That’s why it is frustrating to see so much “social media news” on here. The purveyors just say it’s because QBN needs more content.toemaas
    • Public officials shouldn't be on social media at all. They've got official channels.neverscared
    • I have a few very far right friends. I like them, despise some of their beliefs. Hope they can see a better way somehow.noRGB
  • dkoblesky0

    Everyone wants to make social media this bad thing that, if we just didn't have it, well these problems we have would not really be so bad

    Social media is just a dumb piece of software. It may show you specific things based on who you are, but so does television, so does print, so do the billboards you drive by...of course in different ways.

    No one forces you to act because of the way these tools make suggestions for you. You still have free will.

    People who are dumb enough to believe Qanon would probably have believed it anyway. Plenty of cults happened without social media. I mean the Elders if Zion shit has been around forever.

    I am not saying that the new ways social media work are not worth analyzing. And Facebook is so big that it probably should be regulated by government...or something like that

    But it is too simplistic to just say 'Facebook, ie Social Media.,,,bad'

    Is QBN bad? I like QBN...and get something out of it....but I am strong enough not to click the NSFW thread just because it is there

    • Facebook quite literally fuels the fire to this shit.section_014
    • Social media from the start...has always brought the worst out in people i.e. trolls, hatred, jealousy, ego, self-importance, propaganda, etc..utopian
    • Does QBN qualify as social media with a 100 users?utopian
    • maybe social media also brings out the good in people...?dkoblesky
  • trooperbill0

    the issue is audience profiling and content targeting that creates a self reinforcing echo chamber that drives people more and more to the left/right

  • Fax_Benson0
  • utopian2

    Facebook and Twitter are finally both self destructing, they have created the monster and now its eating itself. They've collectively been ripping apart the social fabric of how society works and are responsible for destroying society one tweet/post at a time.

    • yes.renderedred
    • Fb could die and it is, slowly, but twitter is the thing - tw is more relevant, THE public squaregrafician
    • I don't agree with this. I think that is exactly the kind of mirror that humanity needs. So that we can get rid of lying hypocritical people forever.sted
    • I always bring in the catholic church into this argument and the hundreds of years of its good deeds.sted
    • Like how they kept people in the dark, spread misinformation, and get involved in politics by manipulating the masses.sted
    • fb is already imploding in my view, twitter is on its way.renderedred
  • grafician2

    Think this thread is very relevant here:

    "the influence of social media has created a perspective in artists that they need to produce masterful quality works in a large enough quantity so that they can be shared on an almost daily basis. this is an impossible standard that forces artists to create uninspired work. (1/-)

    issues resulting in lack of depth, emotion, personality, and sincerity in the production of visual works arise. if visual art is not captivating enough on a first glance, a 'like' will not be granted from the audience, and the digital work will die. (2/-)

    this impossible turn around time on production results in a disconnection between the artist and their work, and largely the work from the audience. growth is measured in numbers on a large scale, without likes/retweets/follows, the artist has missed their mark and failed. (3/-)

    art is a visual language that exists only in sincerity of expression - visual art digested by audiences through social media platforms perpetuates the belief that trends are art, and in turn destroying the integrity of sincerity. artistry is lost, propaganda is created. (4/-)

    who is the critic? in this climate, artist's works are viewed almost exclusively by other artists. when a post is created, its fate is largely decided by a small group of users within the first 10 minutes. fresh artists can not grow without a hand from seasoned artists. (5/-)

    this being the case, an artist must play the game or die. influence is taken from larger accounts, silencing fresh voices and keeping aesthetics of visual art on trend with what works in the world of social media. break the trend and risk engagement. a circle is created. (6/-)

    vis art is now broken into subcultures defined by a larger community. an artists on 'photo twitter' must exist in a bubble. if aesthetics are not on par with what is produced by the majority, engagement is lost if there isn't a fresh sense of ingenuity in the field. (7/-)

    cliques are created in the forms of group chats. this is correlated simply by lunch tables in middle school - each subculture existing in their own bubble. artists are granted entry by clout or aesthetics, with there rarely ever being an in between. (8/-)

    this creates a toxic state of being for the mind set of a visual artist on social platforms. to succeed in this culture without creating one's own cult following, an artist must befriend users in their field or risk losing their chance at accumulating 'clout'. (9/-)

    at what cost would you risk losing an active voice of sincerity in your works? this post exists for no other purpose than to state observations made in my current length of stay on social media. (10/10)

    addition: i’d like to note that i’ve read every comment posted and am responding to all private messages - hearing personal experiences is insightful and invaluable to me, as well as conversing about other perspectives than what i have written in this thread."

    https://twitter.com/fatherrich_/…

    • artists need to find the discipline to know when work is done. I don't know any artists who produce great work every day. it is not possibledkoblesky
    • success defined by number of followers....is a concept that needs to be broken. It is like defining yourself by money....it will make you crazydkoblesky
    • ^yeah ikr but this is very real today, unless you post constantly and in specific expected terms, you don't exist on social media it seems these daysgrafician
    • and sure, having a pretty face, a nice ass, some huge...ahem "personality" is a must too

      what a pathetic state of things...
      grafician
  • sted1

    The generation behind us (1st and 2nd gen internet user) is much more honest and open.
    Does not cares what detail they give up because they don't have anything to regret.

    • morals and ethics have no meaning to them. is that a good thing or not? i ask myself frequently.renderedred
    • I wonder if Parler users thought they were on the dark web.DRIFTMONKEY
    • "dumbfucks"grafician
  • mort_2