Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
I have seen that many people are concerned about my generation, gen z because of Social media and what it's doing to our brains and I wanted to say about my experience with it.
If it wasn't for social media I would only have my family and no one else because my social skills are terrible and that's not because of social media as I didn't have a phone until I was 16, it's because of my Autism.
I genuinely feel if it weren't for Twitter and Discord my life would be so much worse and I may not even be here anymore.
These people who have this 'concern' never seem to think about people like me who actually have benefited from social media and whose lives would be immediately so much worse without it.
It's because of the newfangled technologies the dern'd whippersnappers can only aimlessly try to click their books, and couldn't even read the highfalutin things if they could even manage to figure out how to use them.
It all started with those Nintendos, and the world kept careening from there.
Zoomers actually do a way better job of not being addicted to social media than boomers do. Of course, everyone has their phase, especially in high school. But once we got into college, everybody is extremely personable.
Not only that, but because we aren't locked to single bubble of where we leave, zoomers are so much more empathetic and socially conscious as well. The majority of zoomers stand for LGBTQ rights, support diversity and neurodiversity, and just in general, do a lot more then millennials did.
I am super proud of our generation, as we have been able to accomplish so much in just a few years. Especially once we reached voting age, which was around the 2018 election for most zoomers. And we aren't even done yet. The students that I have coming up that are graduating, are even better than we are honestly as a group. They are going to really go out there and change the world.
Really, though, there are valid reasons to be concerned: self-esteem issues, ubiquity of false information, et cetera.
A lot of it seems more like concern trolling, though, from people who would always wax eloquent about how "you can't always believe everything you read on the internet" and how "the youths these days are addicted to their digital devices" and who now ... often have their faces constantly in the Facebook and believe everything they see (but especially if it supports what they already believed! Truly a trap we would all be wise to be cognizant of). Let this be a cautionary tale.
But it has always been this way.
There are pitfalls to avoid, and which many people -- especially of the sort who tend to rant about this type of thing -- fall right into, but there's also a lot of good that can come from technology.
Elder millennial here. I was on social media before we even called it social media. Without the ability to communicate over the internet I would have lost out on lifelong friendships, and most of the people I lean on today would not be in my life. I ran to the internet when I was young because people in the real world were bullies, were violent, were manipulative, were hateful. And as I got older, boomers would give me hell for being "on the internet" as though going out and getting drunk, shouting at sports, and getting into fights like "normal" people in town did would have somehow been better for me. Modern social media with how toxic it's become? Yeah I'm kinda worried about the effect that has on younger people, but to be honest that toxicity was there before social media, it was just expressed in person. I had to learn how to recognize and avoid it, and I'm sure the same is the case for Zoomers online now. Same shit, different medium, is all. If you can find a way to make it work for you and learn how to properly navigate it, a whole world opens up. Any path through which you can find friendship, acceptance, and comfort is rad as hell and should be embraced.
With you pal, I spent most of my 11-18 year old time period on IRC, no different than what the guy above is describing but 25 years earlier.
There are boomers who spent most of their time on Usenet/BBS.
Amazingly how much of that actually turned into career / life shaping experiences.
Really the only thing I`m nostalgic for is there were so few people around on IRC / BBSES that day, it was easier to not feel like a nobody, heh. The vast sea of twitter does that to you.
When Todd Howard would reply directly to most random fans comments about morrowind on the companies forums.
When you started talking about social media, my first thought was Instagram and TikTok and i was a little sceptical on how both those apps improved your life (i'm complaining about them, although i try to use Instagram for the memes between the ads and garbage content) but then you mentioned Twitter and Discord and it made more sense.
I spent most of my 11-17 years on IRC, MSN messenger (really popular on my country) and old forums; that was how i met a lot of people that i would never met on real life, and it helped me alot on not feeling lonely and also improving friendships in IRL, since i was shy but i could express more openly through online chatting and sms texting. Older generations always complained about something that new generations do, or are more involved in, so don't worry about it; they should look at themselves first and see the impact that Facebook/Instragram/Tiktok is having on them before voicing their "concerns" about you zoomers.
I've met quite a fair share of people whole lives have been actively made worse by being on Social media. Anything from the overbearingly negative mood the algorithms impose when suggesting content, to the ever-present lack of nuance in most information, is seriously harmful. And it's no wonder a lot of mental health professionals will insist on leaving social media as the first step to recovering.
I'm not gonna say it has absolutely no advantages, and I'm glad you comparatively lucked out on this, seriously. But don't assume your experience is going to be the same for everyone, because even among your generation, everyone is different, and everyone has different social media circles. So it can in fact become a shitty influence on other gen z's mental state.
I've met quite a fair share of people whole lives have been actively made worse by being on Social media. Anything from the overbearingly negative mood the algorithms impose when suggesting content, to the ever-present lack of nuance in most information, is seriously harmful. And it's no wonder a lot of mental health professionals will insist on leaving social media as the first step to recovering.
I'm not gonna say it has absolutely no advantages, and I'm glad you comparatively lucked out on this, seriously. But don't assume your experience is going to be the same for everyone, because even among your generation, everyone is different, and everyone has different social media circles. So it can in fact become a shitty influence on other gen z's mental state.
So we should ban Social media??
But if we do that, then people like me would have massively worse lives and it in fact would be harmful to not have it, so what's the solution here??
So we should ban Social media??
But if we do that, then people like me would have massively worse lives and it in fact would be harmful to not have it, so what's the solution here??
I haven't said anything about banning social media at any point. All I've said is that your experience might not be universal; and that you might have lucked out here. In fact, I'd rather you'd be aware of how lucky you have been to be in that situation, and treasure that.
This is specifically why I was talking about lack of nuance. Most problems are quite complicated, and simple "YES/NO" answers can't solve any of them. It's not a "Ban social media or keep it???" debate as much as seeing if some people are more sensitive to what's presented there to others, if some people are affected negatively or not, if some users are more harmful to the community than others. It's incredibly complicated. I don't have a solution.
All I know is that generalizing an experience as the universal truth ain't it. There's a lot of people in your generation that suffer cyberbullying on social media daily. There's a lot of people older than you whose existing depression diagnosis can get worse by being exposed to social media. Would you force them to use social media just because it has made your personal life better? I'm guessing no.
I haven't said anything about banning social media at any point. All I've said is that your experience might not be universal; and that you might have lucked out here. In fact, I'd rather you'd be aware of how lucky you have been to be in that situation, and treasure that.
This is specifically why I was talking about lack of nuance. Most problems are quite complicated, and simple "YES/NO" answers can't solve any of them. It's not a "Ban social media or keep it???" debate as much as seeing if some people are more sensitive to what's presented there to others, if some people are affected negatively or not, if some users are more harmful to the community than others. It's incredibly complicated. I don't have a solution.
All I know is that generalizing an experience as the universal truth ain't it. There's a lot of people in your generation that suffer cyberbullying on social media daily. There's a lot of people older than you whose existing depression diagnosis can get worse by being exposed to social media. Would you force them to use social media just because it has made your personal life better? I'm guessing no.
But if Social media is as terrible and evil as you are saying, then wouldn't getting rid of it all, only be a net positive.
Hey it would make my life so much worse but it would save kids' mental health.
But if Social media is as terrible and evil as you are saying, then wouldn't getting rid of it all, only be a net positive.
Hey it would make my life so much worse but it would save kids' mental health.
I don't think most people deny that social media doesn't have any positive effects, it's just that the world are just starting to become aware of its dark side. Around 10 years ago, social media utopianism was goddamn everywhere and nobody questioned whether these sites could have harmful effects. Zuckenberg was seen as a hero that had united humanity and educational institutions framed him as an example for future generations. Then Trump was elected (along a new wave of fascism around the world), the whole Cambridge Analytics scheme was revealed and Qanon stormed the Capitol, so people started to realize that while social media might have benefitted them in the past, it brought out the worst in a lot of people. I don't think most people want to ban social media, they want others to be more conscious of its negative effects, hence why there is a lot of emphasis on the cons when discussing these networks.
Speaking as someone who sometimes gets labeled as a zoomer and sometimes as a milennial, I've experienced first hand the negative effects of social media. Before the pandemic I was working with a very wholesome guy who was a bit younger than me, but I was surprised when he used the "autistic screeching" meme that originated on dark places of the Internet, which definitely soured my opinion of said person. When I was in high school I had a friend who was addicted to 4Chan, and although I didn't think the site was very harmful at the time, it's weird when I remember him spouting alt-rightish nonsense, stuff along the lines "green energies are a scam" or "free healthcare is actually bad".
All of this stuff is like the Twilight Zone to me, because older people than me have always commented about how my generation is made of super empathetic critical thinkers and how we will save the world from fascism and other toxic ideologies, but when I get into social media I see people of my age, or even younger than, me engaging in toxic behavior that range from cyber bullying and body shaming, to transphobia and ableism. In my own personal experience, social media has reinforced those moral blind spots of my generation (transphobia, ableism, etc.) rather than eliminating them, which is what a lot older people hoped for. We are just as vulnerable as Fox News boomers IMHO, we were born just a little bit later.
I think people feel bad for zoomers for the same reason they'll feel bad for every new generation: there will be less opportunities and less resources and no generational wealth to offset that.
As part of Gen Z, social media is a problem but it's not nearly as big of a problem as, I dunno, not being able to afford anything out of high school and a global pandemic and wars and racism/homophobia and violence.
I'm a millennial and had the same socialization problems, and I just turned to forums. As far back as like the 80s to mid 90s depending on how easy it was for you to access something like BBS you always had this kind of alternative.
Social media is a curse and a blessing and it's something humanity is going to have to learn to adapt to, even gen z isn't close to that yet.
Has it helped me as a lonely gay person in a rather homophobic family? Yes
Have I seen plenty of toxic behaviour on insta/tiktok videos form within the community or from ''allies'' that gets touted as the absolute truth to people that follow them? Also yes.
I'll echo what everyone else is saying - the internet has done to boomers the exact thing they were trying to scare us with 20 years ago.
If you have to use social media (I don't anymore) set up a robust list of filters. Block people without a second thought. No good will come of carrying a little square full of hate around with you.
Also get outside if and when you can. Look at a tree. Read a book. Read a book under the tree.
Here's the thing about social media and the internet in general: It's a nice alternative, but it's really not a substitute in most cases and yet it gets used like that.
If it's your only viable solution, that's fine. But for most people using the internet as a social crutch, this is probably not the case, and I think there's definitely a possibility in some truth to the idea that a lot of people might have been better off if they had to adapt to a non-internet environment.
Then again, maybe not. Who knows! For the vast majority of internet or social media users, these stereotypes don't apply and are stupid. In general, like all things in life, the internet is neutral and what matters is how it is used!
So here's the thing, and it ties into how Tangerine_Cookie earlier was referencing dangers and pitfalls of social media but outright saying that doesn't mean it's all bad, or how I had also referenced dangers and pitfalls but said that doesn't mean it's all bad: social media is a tool, neither inherently good nor bad; it all depends on how the tool is used and what results from it.
Discord hasn't really been my thing, but, for instance, it might not have algorithms pushing hate or negativity for the engagement, but it can still create echo chambers, leaving the user unexposed to other ideas, increasingly convinced of their own without necessarily having a defense for it, and possibly drifting farther away from views more aligned with the world.
There's also the question of authenticity. For as easy as some people might find it to live falsehoods in real life, it becomes so much easier in general online (for instance, I'm much more charming and charismatic in real life than I am here), to where one might be interacting with real people, but they're not real; rather, they are tricksy, false.
And even if otherwise used to both good means and ends, there's even still the possibility of using it to ignore or neglect things that are better yet.
Social media can serve for practical purposes or otherwise beneficial results, but it can also hide a more nefarious side. Simply because one form lacks certain more unsavory attributes does not mean it is inherently good. It is a tool. It simply is.
So here's the thing, and it ties into how Tangerine_Cookie earlier was referencing dangers and pitfalls of social media but outright saying that doesn't mean it's all bad, or how I had also referenced dangers and pitfalls but said that doesn't mean it's all bad: social media is a tool, neither inherently good nor bad; it all depends on how the tool is used and what results from it.
Discord hasn't really been my thing, but, for instance, it might not have algorithms pushing hate or negativity for the engagement, but it can still create echo chambers, leaving the user unexposed to other ideas, increasingly convinced of their own without necessarily having a defense for it, and possibly drifting farther away from views more aligned with the world.
There's also the question of authenticity. For as easy as some people might find it to live falsehoods in real life, it becomes so much easier in general online (for instance, I'm much more charming and charismatic in real life than I am here), to where one might be interacting with real people, but they're not real; rather, they are tricksy, false.
And even if otherwise used to both good means and ends, there's even still the possibility of using it to ignore or neglect things that are better yet.
Social media can serve for practical purposes or otherwise beneficial results, but it can also hide a more nefarious side. Simply because one form lacks certain more unsavory attributes does not mean it is inherently good. It is a tool. It simply is.
There's no need to jump to its absolute defense.
Aye, I've seen the discourse here. Online discourse, though, often does have an unsavory bent, often lacking and unfruitful
Isn't it just exposing the ugly side of people, so the awful people you interact with online, that's how they truly are.
So if you interact with good people from multiple different backgrounds then it can be a good thing right, surely you aren't saying we should be interacting with awful people otherwise it's terrible.
Isn't it just exposing the ugly side of people, so the awful people you interact with online, that's how they truly are.
So if you interact with good people from multiple different backgrounds then it can be a good thing right, surely you aren't saying we should be interacting with awful people otherwise it's terrible.
If that's the case then you wouldn't mind organising a meet up or at least a video call then, you wouldn't want to be harming me now.
You are basically saying it's harmful to have friends who you can meet up with at least once a month
If that's the case then you wouldn't mind organising a meet up or at least a video call then, you wouldn't want to be harming me now.
You are basically saying it's harmful to have friends who you can meet up with at least once a month
If that's the case then you wouldn't mind organising a meet up or at least a video call then, you wouldn't want to be harming me now.
You are basically saying it's harmful to have friends who you can meet up with at least once a month
That's a lot easier said then done, as, using me as an example, I wouldn't be nearly as socialable as I am online, irl and so me having to talk to people idk in person imo would be a lot more harmful than doing the same online.
Isn't it just exposing the ugly side of people, so the awful people you interact with online, that's how they truly are.
So if you interact with good people from multiple different backgrounds then it can be a good thing right, surely you aren't saying we should be interacting with awful people otherwise it's terrible.
If that's the case then you wouldn't mind organising a meet up or at least a video call then, you wouldn't want to be harming me now.
You are basically saying it's harmful to have friends who you can meet up with at least once a month
Brock's not harming you by not organizing a meetup, and, unless some random person online organizing to meet you is the only way to have non-online interactions, it's fallacious to suggest so. That's a massive leap with no support.
Saying that a lack of interaction in the real world, with all that entails, can be harmful isn't the same as saying everyone must meet you, nor does it indicate having friends you can meet with occasionally is bad (scheduling is hard, and many, many adults don't see their friends particularly often).
Unless I'm misunderstanding something here, it really doesn't. It's saying there's a lot to communication and personal interaction that doesn't come across over the internet, and that only ever interacting with people through such methods leaves one without that exposure and, possibly, trained for interaction in ways that aren't conducive to real-world interaction.
And I'm not trying to pick on you or be mean here, but there are a number of instances in this thread alone where you're telling people what they said, only for them to tell you they never said such a thing (because they didn't). It might be worth examining why that is.
That's a lot easier said then done, as, using me as an example, I wouldn't be nearly as socialable as I am online, irl and so me having to talk to people idk in person imo would be a lot more harmful than doing the same online.
I have no doubt it could be more difficult, especially if you have trouble following social cues, but I'm not so certain "harmful" is the correct word. Unpleasant, perhaps, but we often grow by facing that which is difficult and unpleasant.
Then what are you saying because 'people talking to each other too much without social cues is harmful' definitely implies that imo
That's a lot easier said then done, as, using me as an example, I wouldn't be nearly as socialable as I am online, irl and so me having to talk to people idk in person imo would be a lot more harmful than doing the same online.
Well I'm not terribly social myself, but there's so much that is lost in online communication and introduces several challenges. Body language, voice tones, vocabulary, etc.
Also, you cannot shelter yourself forever that way. You'll learn nothing about conflict solving, 'reading the room', picking battles, etc. You have to take the good with the bad, and it's not like you can 'block' people in real life like one might do online.
Brock's not harming you by not organizing a meetup, and, unless some random person online organizing to meet you is the only way to have non-online interactions, it's fallacious to suggest so. That's a massive leap with no support.
Saying that a lack of interaction in the real world, with all that entails, can be harmful isn't the same as saying everyone must meet you, nor does it indicate having friends you can meet with occasionally is bad (scheduling is hard, and many, many adults don't see their friends particularly often).
Unless I'm misunderstanding something here, it really doesn't. It's saying there's a lot to communication and personal interaction that doesn't come across over the internet, and that only ever interacting with people through such methods leaves one without that exposure and, possibly, trained for interaction in ways that aren't conducive to real-world interaction.
And I'm not trying to pick on you or be mean here, but there are a number of instances in this thread alone where you're telling people what they said, only for them to tell you they never said such a thing (because they didn't). It might be worth examining why that is.
I have no doubt it could be more difficult, especially if you have trouble following social cues, but I'm not so certain "harmful" is the correct word. Unpleasant, perhaps, but we often grow by facing that which is difficult and unpleasant.
1st off I am going to preface this by saying neither of you said any of this, only I am saying this bc otherwise you will get confused and think I'm claiming you said that.
1.I don't understand how all online interactions, even with good people, can be bad.
2..you are missing my point, what I am saying is, IF ONLINE INTERACTIONS ARE HARMFUL, then surely brock would want to organise a meetup because he surely wouldn't want to do me harm by continuing to interact with me online.
3. None of my friends live close by, in fact, most of them live in other countries, so my choice is to either interact with then exclusively online or not have them as friends at all.
4.I have never claimed anyone has said anything that they haven't, what have I done is claimed that people have implied something, which means that they meant something without actually saying it. So instead of accusing me of making stuff up, you could do the more friendly approach and correct me on the implications of your words.
5. I am talking about my mental health, when I say harmful because, let's give this for example, if all of this happened in person, it would cause some quite distress if random strangers, came up to me with these points and I would most likely have a meltdown.
Well I'm not terribly social myself, but there's so much that is lost in online communication and introduces several challenges. Body language, voice tones, vocabulary, etc.
Also, you cannot shelter yourself forever that way. You'll learn nothing about conflict solving, 'reading the room', picking battles, etc. You have to take the good with the bad, and it's not like you can 'block' people in real life like one might do online.
I'm not trying to shelter myself but being online is saving my mental health, because I am unable to get my voice to work when talking to new people and no it's not because of social media as I was exactly the same in secondary school and I never had a phone there, I only got when I was 16 and had left.
I go to college every week and I try to make friends there but I fail every time because my voice doesn't work, if someone else doesn't initiate the conversation.
Again I am not claiming that either of you said any of this, only I have said it or gleamed the wrong implications of your words.
I have seen that many people are concerned about my generation, gen z because of Social media and what it's doing to our brains and I wanted to say about my experience with it.
If it wasn't for social media I would only have my family and no one else because my social skills are terrible and that's not because of social media as I didn't have a phone until I was 16, it's because of my Autism.
I genuinely feel if it weren't for Twitter and Discord my life would be so much worse and I may not even be here anymore.
These people who have this 'concern' never seem to think about people like me who actually have benefited from social media and whose lives would be immediately so much worse without it.
I am happy that you can connect over social media. The problem is that during the creation of any of those apps, the coorperation behind it, hires an army of psychologists to create a social media app which is based on tbe same system like gambling. It is litterally the same. Every like gives you a dopamin hit and once you are addicted , it will be hard for a person to get happy without it because of the dopamin rush you need.
I am happy that you can connect over social media. The problem is that during the creation of any of those apps, the coorperation behind it, hires an army of psychologists to create a social media app which is based on tbe same system like gambling. It is litterally the same. Every like gives you a dopamin hit and once you are addicted , it will be hard for a person to get happy without it because of the dopamin rush you need.
Well I have been on social media for a long time and I can easily get happy without it.
The problem for me isn't the addiction bit the fact without social media, I would be incredibly lonely and have no friends at all.
I have tried to make friends irl on my own, but it looks like I can't.
Well I have been on social media for a long time and I can easily get happy without it.
The problem for me isn't the addiction bit the fact without social media, I would be incredibly lonely and have no friends at all.
I have tried to make friends irl on my own, but it looks like I can't.
Yes. And maybe your autism comes here into play and gives you an advantage. Maybe you are not as effected by the dopamin rush but how times per year is social media bulliying people into self harm? How many times do people feel lonely the moment the plattform bans them? Should this be the case? Why feeling lonely over a ban? It has pros and cons but if your pros are, talking with people online, you can do that with messages, letters, hand signs, text messages, voice messages, skype etc. Then those pros arent enough for me to see it more positively. So you dont really need that aspect of "socializing". Its just for messaging.
I never said they did, what I was doing is responding to what I thought was the implications of their words.
Can you please offer a correction to my implications of their words, if I got it dreadfully wrong.
I apologise if you thought I was making stuff up about what you said, because that was never my attention. I was only gleaming the implications of your words.
Yes. And maybe your autism comes here into play and gives you an advantage. Maybe you are not as effected by the dopamin rush but how times per year is social media bulliying people into self harm? How many times do people feel lonely the moment the plattform bans them? Should this be the case? Why feeling lonely over a ban? It has pros and cons but if your pros are, talking with people online, you can do that with messages, letters, hand signs, text messages, voice messages, skype etc. Then those pros arent enough for me to see it more positively. So you dont really need that aspect of "socializing". Its just for messaging.
Yes I agree that for many, or indeed, most it's incredibly harmful for them, but I am talking just about me here and, believe me, if I could reduce it all, to just messaging people online, then I would, bc that's all I would need.
I am not trying to make you see it more positively in general, but to see the positive impact it has had on me and how worse off my life would have been without it. If beyond that you see it negatively, then you have all convinced me that in general, social media is harmful, but for myself, not having social media would be harmful for me and again I am talking about myself here.
2..you are missing my point, what I am saying is, IF ONLINE INTERACTIONS ARE HARMFUL, then surely brock would want to organise a meetup because he surely wouldn't want to do me harm by continuing to interact with me online.
If you have a magical solution that get me some friends that live close to me, I wouldn't be online as much as I am because atm spending less time online means spending more time alone for me.
This is just for me, not anyone else.
I would have to make a similar point, but from a "school jumper" perspective. I never went to what is considered "the physical address designated" school. So the change of elementary -> middle -> high school, usually meant having to start from scratch with a new friend group. However, thanks to social media (Facebook) beginning to grow by the end of elementary school, we could still keep in touch once school ended. The same happening during the summers. A cheap PC was still more common for a kid, than a proper cellphone back then. So Facebook made it easier to keep in touch with friends that we could only normally see during school months. Of course, because of age all of this was with parental supervision, specially having a Facebook account. The same with the friends that had a Facebook account. Up until now, we all turned out with no issues because of early usage of social media. If anything, it helped us handle the current events easier and make the transition to online university easier. However, something that I would like to bring notice in all of this is: parents being involved.
A lot of the issues that stem from social media & technology nowaday, go deeper than a generic "social media is bad". A lot of the parents of our generation, and those of our generation that are already parents of Generation Alpha, simply let technology and social media be glorified babysitters. They never bothered to supervize, to warn, to show the basics, or even the basics of adding parental controls to the device via which social media was accessed. Though, of course, it is not all their fault that this occured. Many of them are children of a generation that villified early technology and online interaction. Those of us in Latin American countries, or well Caribbean US Colony in my case, know that in places, this was not only villified. It was worse than that. Religious figures with influence on the general populace demonized technology, literally saying devices were demon spawns and the such, which worsened the situation even more. What situation you would probably ask? Technology and social media illiteracy. A big part of the "Gen Z problem", many of our generational peers grew up with grandparents that despised early technology, and parents that grew up with no technology because of that. So they were the first ones to learn, learn on their own, unsupervised, and with no direction. Which made our fellow members of Gen Z easy targets to predatory tendencies that migrated to social media.
Yes, migrated. Because we can solely blame social media on all the current wrongs, but that is taking the same easy route as older generations blaming crime on "not spanking those kids enough". It simply ignores all the societal, psychological, educational, and economic reasons behind the issues. Because lets be entirely honest, many of the issues blamed on social media were already there before, social media only put out on the open how many people easily fall prey to them:
- Conspiracy theories? They were always there, promulgated to the general populace easily via tabloids in every supermarket and gossip TV shows. Two areas that easily let them flourish and gain believers no matter how crazy they were, just ask Hillary Clinton.
- Unhealthy beauty and popularity standards? Just like conspiracy theories, they have been easily spread and damaging teens for decades via teen fashion magazines.
- Toxic fanbases? Fanclubs with toxic attitudes among themselves, people outside the community, and towards the artists themselves have also been there for decades.
- Teen challenges? The same, teens have been making stupid challenges among themselves for generations. Only that in the past, they used to remain intra-school.
Social media didn't create these problems, it simply brought them to public notice and via a medium where they could all be noticed at the same time. It stopped being isolated cases of the local "crazies" that believed Hillary Clinton had adopted an alien, or the teen girl in each school year that began to look abnormally slim, or the overdefensive fans of a series no one wanted to interact with, etc. Now we could see all the people with those believes, or going through those situations in the same place, on a worldwide scale. Many times amplified by a predatory algorithm to a generation that grew learning on their own the basics of the internet, and to two previous generations who in comparison are just beginning to dwabble into these spaces and easily fall into internet echo chambers. A situation that will only worsen with older and newer generations if we do not help them with the basics, teach them what we would had wanted to be teached when we were delving into the social media world. Because ignoring the technology illiteracy problem at the root, will just have the same end result of ignoring the socio-economic roots of crime: nothing, just a generation complacent with themselves by blaming a common denominator for their grievances.
Maybe I just don't understand Autism properly but I feel like instead of just relying on social media you should try putting yourself in more irl social situations to practice and get better in them. Social media could be being used as a crutch.
I personally think Social Media in general can make people too aware of things, I don't think we were really made for it and I find the people who are often most happy are the people who are living quieter more focused lives away from it.
Maybe I just don't understand Autism properly but I feel like instead of just relying on social media you should try putting yourself in more irl social situations to practice and get better in them. Social media could be being used as a crutch.
Since September 2019, I have tried over and over to make friends in college but have failed every time, so I don't have any friends that live close to me. I am getting help to better my social skills but so far no joy.
I also live in a pretty rural area, so there aren't many events going on where I can make friends outside of college.
It's not a lack of trying, trust me.
Since September 2019, I have tried over and over to make friends in college but have failed every time, so I don't have any friends that live close to me. I am getting help to better my social skills but so far no joy.
I also live in a pretty rural area, so there aren't many events going on where I can make friends outside of college.
It's not a lack of trying, trust me.
That's fair. I think it's a case of for certain people it can be helpful and for others, it can be harmful, I don't really think there's an easy or simple solution to the problems of social media.
That's fair. I think it's a case of for certain people it can be helpful and for others, it can be harmful, I don't really think there's an easy or simple solution to the problems of social media.
Yeah I have realised that and even for the people who social media is harmful to them, I think forcibly removing them from it would be harmful too as they would probably experience some sort of withdrawal issues.
It's a very delicate area, too much in either direction and I feel major issues would happen.
First, I understand real-world interactions can be difficult for you. I can't say I have answers for any of that.
Now, you say you're going to college. This is filled with various kinds of potential interaction. How does that usually go? How do you handle both that which is unpleasant and that which is good?
I know you've said you're trying to find and make friends, but that it's not been working, especially because you just can't make yourself talk unless first spoken to. Are there any groups there that might be helpful? Specialized interest clubs? On-campus support?
Again, I don't have the answers, but I do wish you the best.
So here's the thing, and it ties into how Tangerine_Cookie earlier was referencing dangers and pitfalls of social media but outright saying that doesn't mean it's all bad, or how I had also referenced dangers and pitfalls but said that doesn't mean it's all bad: social media is a tool, neither inherently good nor bad; it all depends on how the tool is used and what results from it.
1st off I am going to preface this by saying neither of you said any of this, only I am saying this bc otherwise you will get confused and think I'm claiming you said that.
1.I don't understand how all online interactions, even with good people, can be bad.
As understood, nobody is saying this, so I'm not sure why it's in question. You're about to insist just a bit farther down that this isn't just you saying these, but that it's the implied meaning of what you're responding to -- which means you're saying people are saying these things, just not explicitly. Where do you see this implied (especially given surrounding contexts)?
The way I see this, it's not about all interaction being bad, nor about casting moral judgment on those involved (your repeated refrains regarding good and bad people), but about the general state of internet discourse as a whole.
Discourse is often surface deep, if that, tending against in-depth discussion despite the medium being formatted to facilitate such, full of fallacies and misinformed or malicious half-truths or even outright lies, with armchair experts and well-intentioned Dunning-Kruger victims, replete with people talking past each other; it's a reflection of the outside world, to be sure, but it excels at funneling all these aspects into one place.
Regarding the whole problem of good people and bad people, you can have a group of good, well-intentioned people who together still exemplify many unfortunate attributes of internet discourse.
Remember that Brock's response here is in reply to your unprompted insistence on Discord being an absolute good.
Social media is a tool; it, and thus Discord, is neither inherently good nor bad.
2..you are missing my point, what I am saying is, IF ONLINE INTERACTIONS ARE HARMFUL, then surely brock would want to organise a meetup because he surely wouldn't want to do me harm by continuing to interact with me online.
Again, nobody is saying all online interaction is inherently harmful. In general, it has the potential to be, but that's all it is. It's a tool, neither inherently good nor bad: it just is.
For this hypothetical, though, if all online interaction were inherently harmful and Brock were of this opinion, Brock would be (a) some sort of self-destructive masochist, (b) actively intending to cause harm, or (c) not here in the first place, in which situations, none suggest he would want to organize a meetup, nor that you should necessarily want to meet up with him. Technically, he could be (d) engaging in valiant acts of self-sacrifice to warn people of the horrors of the internet, but I suspect we can safely discard that option.
And it's generally accepted that one should be cautious about meeting people from the internet, regardless.
But it's moot, since nobody is arguing that.
On the Confusion of Explicit Statements and an Additional Takeaway: My Bad
3. None of my friends live close by, in fact, most of them live in other countries, so my choice is to either interact with then exclusively online or not have them as friends at all.
But this doesn't preclude the possibility of meeting people nearby who can be your friend either -- and, yes, for your situation alternative means of communication might be useful for building that.
And, again, I know this isn't easy for you, but it would be beneficial overall, now and in the long run. You say you've been trying, and I don't know what avenues are available, but if there is anything at the campus that might help, it's worth looking into.
But nobody's saying you have to discard the friends you have. That's actually a potential benefit of our digital age: The prospective ease of maintaining those friendships despite distance.
4.I have never claimed anyone has said anything that they haven't, what have I done is claimed that people have implied something, which means that they meant something without actually saying it. So instead of accusing me of making stuff up, you could do the more friendly approach and correct me on the implications of your words.
Why the patronizing tone? I'm not some absolute ignoramus, as you seem to imply. I know what implications are.
But the thing is, your inferences often aren't soundly backed by implication in the text itself -- commonly contradicting even what was explicitly stated.
To a user who outright said, explicitly stated, they weren't saying it was all bad or without benefit.
Sure, the bulk of the message dealt with the more unsavory side of social media, but it was indicated this was a reminder that your experience doesn't apply to everyone, to ensure the broader picture is considered, not to say the whole idea is altogether evil.
Look at the context of the message. Your takeaway isn't even implied. And you don't even frame your response as being to an implication, but to a statement, not even implying its inferred from subtext, outright saying:
Isn't it just exposing the ugly side of people, so the awful people you interact with online, that's how they truly are.
So if you interact with good people from multiple different backgrounds then it can be a good thing right, surely you aren't saying we should be interacting with awful people otherwise it's terrible.
It can still create echo chambers, leaving the user unexposed to other ideas, increasingly convinced of their own without necessarily having a defense for it, and possibly drifting farther away from views more aligned with the world.
Because that's, again, not tied to good people or bad people. You'll find that in groups of any persuasion. Well-intentioned people can form echo chambers that amplify and reinforce wrong ideas, just the same as anyone else. There's nothing here about good people and bad people.
There is a reference to the ability to live a false life online, but I can't fathom how you would have taken that to mean these people are the necessary people with whom to interact and otherwise it's bad.
But you're asking me to explain how you misinterpreted something in a long-ish post here, which touches on a few different details, without saying what it is you interpreted that way.
However, I will note that the framing of the whole post goes against what you decided it means; this was the post that was bookended with comments about social media being neither inherently good nor bad (again, in response to your insistence that Discord be absolutely good):
So here's the thing, and it ties into how Tangerine_Cookie earlier was referencing dangers and pitfalls of social media but outright saying that doesn't mean it's all bad, or how I had also referenced dangers and pitfalls but said that doesn't mean it's all bad: social media is a tool, neither inherently good nor bad; it all depends on how the tool is used and what results from it.
[...]
Social media can serve for practical purposes or otherwise beneficial results, but it can also hide a more nefarious side. Simply because one form lacks certain more unsavory attributes does not mean it is inherently good. It is a tool. It simply is.
If that's the case then you wouldn't mind organising a meet up or at least a video call then, you wouldn't want to be harming me now. You are basically saying it's harmful to have friends who you can meet up with at least once a month
Here this is taking a reading -- which I've already addressed -- and coming at the poster very strongly based off it. It comes across as rather combative, really, and it's a factor in these examples overall. And it's always indicating the poster says -- yeah, sure, through implication -- something contrary to what they actually said.
Then following it up with a statement that his post means something that ... I also don't really see how you got that interpretation.
But, again, I've talked about that particular post earlier.
I hope I've illustrated well enough, at this point, the ways in which your inferences have been off-base, and also why people keep indicating that you're saying people are saying things they aren't.
Instead of accusing people of implying some rather bizarre things, it might be more conducive to ask for clarification. It would certainly come across as less combative, and things would veer less into "... I didn't say anything like that" as well.
5. I am talking about my mental health, when I say harmful because, let's give this for example, if all of this happened in person, it would cause some quite distress if random strangers, came up to me with these points and I would most likely have a meltdown.
I'm not trying to shelter myself but being online is saving my mental health, because I am unable to get my voice to work when talking to new people and no it's not because of social media as I was exactly the same in secondary school and I never had a phone there, I only got when I was 16 and had left.
I go to college every week and I try to make friends there but I fail every time because my voice doesn't work, if someone else doesn't initiate the conversation.
Again I am not claiming that either of you said any of this, only I have said it or gleamed the wrong implications of your words.
Just to say, random strangers aren't coming up to you with these points. You initiated a conversation, threw out some insistence that surely something must be a particular way, and confrontationally insisted people were implying things contrary to what they were saying. The people you opened the discussion to are responding.
That's not to say you wouldn't have troubles with it, but it's not exactly as you've described.
I'm not your psychiatrist, and I don't have intimate knowledge of how things affect you, but I'm not sure how much this is something that can't change. Again, I don't know if there's some avenue available to you that might help with any of this, some sort of professional advice to help you be able to face these things, but if there is, I implore you to look into it.
First, I understand real-world interactions can be difficult for you. I can't say I have answers for any of that.
Now, you say you're going to college. This is filled with various kinds of potential interaction. How does that usually go? How do you handle both that which is unpleasant and that which is good?
I know you've said you're trying to find and make friends, but that it's not been working, especially because you just can't make yourself talk unless first spoken to. Are there any groups there that might be helpful? Specialized interest clubs? On-campus support?
Again, I don't have the answers, but I do wish you the best.
On the Nature of Internet Society: Good or Bad?
I said it earlier; now here it is again. I hope this contextualizes anything that needs it.
On Whether Anybody is Saying All Online Interaction is Inherently Bad
As understood, nobody is saying this, so I'm not sure why it's in question. You're about to insist just a bit farther down that this isn't just you saying these, but that it's the implied meaning of what you're responding to -- which means you're saying people are saying these things, just not explicitly. Where do you see this implied (especially given surrounding contexts)?
Should I assume you see it here?
The way I see this, it's not about all interaction being bad, nor about casting moral judgment on those involved (your repeated refrains regarding good and bad people), but about the general state of internet discourse as a whole.
Discourse is often surface deep, if that, tending against in-depth discussion despite the medium being formatted to facilitate such, full of fallacies and misinformed or malicious half-truths or even outright lies, with armchair experts and well-intentioned Dunning-Kruger victims, replete with people talking past each other; it's a reflection of the outside world, to be sure, but it excels at funneling all these aspects into one place.
Regarding the whole problem of good people and bad people, you can have a group of good, well-intentioned people who together still exemplify many unfortunate attributes of internet discourse.
Remember that Brock's response here is in reply to your unprompted insistence on Discord being an absolute good.
Social media is a tool; it, and thus Discord, is neither inherently good nor bad.
On the Hypothetical
Again, nobody is saying all online interaction is inherently harmful. In general, it has the potential to be, but that's all it is. It's a tool, neither inherently good nor bad: it just is.
For this hypothetical, though, if all online interaction were inherently harmful and Brock were of this opinion, Brock would be (a) some sort of self-destructive masochist, (b) actively intending to cause harm, or (c) not here in the first place, in which situations, none suggest he would want to organize a meetup, nor that you should necessarily want to meet up with him. Technically, he could be (d) engaging in valiant acts of self-sacrifice to warn people of the horrors of the internet, but I suspect we can safely discard that option.
And it's generally accepted that one should be cautious about meeting people from the internet, regardless.
But it's moot, since nobody is arguing that.
On the Confusion of Explicit Statements and an Additional Takeaway: My Bad
My bad. It sounded like the implication was having friends you can meet every so often is bad:
But this doesn't preclude the possibility of meeting people nearby who can be your friend either -- and, yes, for your situation alternative means of communication might be useful for building that.
And, again, I know this isn't easy for you, but it would be beneficial overall, now and in the long run. You say you've been trying, and I don't know what avenues are available, but if there is anything at the campus that might help, it's worth looking into.
But nobody's saying you have to discard the friends you have. That's actually a potential benefit of our digital age: The prospective ease of maintaining those friendships despite distance.
On Inference and Implication
Why the patronizing tone? I'm not some absolute ignoramus, as you seem to imply. I know what implications are.
But the thing is, your inferences often aren't soundly backed by implication in the text itself -- commonly contradicting even what was explicitly stated.
But, sure, some examples:
In response to the post this was from, you said this:
To a user who outright said, explicitly stated, they weren't saying it was all bad or without benefit.
Sure, the bulk of the message dealt with the more unsavory side of social media, but it was indicated this was a reminder that your experience doesn't apply to everyone, to ensure the broader picture is considered, not to say the whole idea is altogether evil.
Look at the context of the message. Your takeaway isn't even implied. And you don't even frame your response as being to an implication, but to a statement, not even implying its inferred from subtext, outright saying:
You're correct in that nobody is saying that. I said it before, and I'll say it here: I'm really not sure where you got this takeaway from.
Is it because of this?
Because that's, again, not tied to good people or bad people. You'll find that in groups of any persuasion. Well-intentioned people can form echo chambers that amplify and reinforce wrong ideas, just the same as anyone else. There's nothing here about good people and bad people.
There is a reference to the ability to live a false life online, but I can't fathom how you would have taken that to mean these people are the necessary people with whom to interact and otherwise it's bad.
But you're asking me to explain how you misinterpreted something in a long-ish post here, which touches on a few different details, without saying what it is you interpreted that way.
However, I will note that the framing of the whole post goes against what you decided it means; this was the post that was bookended with comments about social media being neither inherently good nor bad (again, in response to your insistence that Discord be absolutely good):
Here this is taking a reading -- which I've already addressed -- and coming at the poster very strongly based off it. It comes across as rather combative, really, and it's a factor in these examples overall. And it's always indicating the poster says -- yeah, sure, through implication -- something contrary to what they actually said.
Then following it up with a statement that his post means something that ... I also don't really see how you got that interpretation.
But, again, I've talked about that particular post earlier.
I hope I've illustrated well enough, at this point, the ways in which your inferences have been off-base, and also why people keep indicating that you're saying people are saying things they aren't.
Instead of accusing people of implying some rather bizarre things, it might be more conducive to ask for clarification. It would certainly come across as less combative, and things would veer less into "... I didn't say anything like that" as well.
That Last Bit
Just to say, random strangers aren't coming up to you with these points. You initiated a conversation, threw out some insistence that surely something must be a particular way, and confrontationally insisted people were implying things contrary to what they were saying. The people you opened the discussion to are responding.
That's not to say you wouldn't have troubles with it, but it's not exactly as you've described.
I'm not your psychiatrist, and I don't have intimate knowledge of how things affect you, but I'm not sure how much this is something that can't change. Again, I don't know if there's some avenue available to you that might help with any of this, some sort of professional advice to help you be able to face these things, but if there is, I implore you to look into it.
For most of it, I am sorry for being combative, that's my bad, I am not sure how I understood any of what I did, when you have laid it out like this.
I think I don't take being told that someone didn't say something that I thought they did, as them basically accusing me for making stuff up maliciously, not sure why I do that and I deeply apologise and will work on taking it better in the future.
As for the making friends part
I British and college here is basically an extension of high school that you can go when ur 16 and you can take high school level courses here, you go on 3 times a week typically.
I started at a different college this past September but the problem was in October I was having surgery, so I had from the until January off. So in that time my classmates made friends but since I wasn't there, left me feeling isolated an none of them tried to help feel a part of the group. It didn't help that in March I had another surgery, so I had even more time off.
The course I am doing atm is a computing course, but in September I am switching to social science, so I am hoping that course will help me make friends, but that obviously means I have nothing to help make friends until then.
I also live in a pretty rural area so most events you could suggest to go to, to try and make friends, simply don't happen here.
I desperately want to make friends that live close to me, but I just don't know if it's possible for me. All the avenues I have tried lead to nothing, which just depress me even more, it doesn't help that my college isn't doing anything other than your course, so there's no extracurricular activity I could go to, but that may be starting off in September.
If there's anything, anything at all, you could suggest that could help me make a friend that lives close by, because it looks like I have tried everything that's available to me, multiple times and they have all led to failure.
I really really want a friend, I truly do but it just doesn't seem possible.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
