I personally use it quite a bit for keeping these relationships alive. I think Facebook is a great tool for that. I have contentious debates over ideas with people I know, but more importantly, with people a couple links away from me. It's been an extremely helpful bridge out of the filter bubble I'd probably otherwise inhabit.
Of course, I'm not at all sure the benefits I've gotten have any resemblance to most peoples' experience on Facebook, and plenty of reason to believe that this isn't the case. And there's no way in hellllll I'd give my daughter a Messenger for Kids app.
It's far better concentrating that effort on something constructive like reading a book or taking part in a creative hobby. Social media is a time suck... I would go so far as describing it as a scourge on humanity.
Yes, the voting system makes it social media. It's not as manipulative as other websites, but it's for that reason I wouldn't class it as a discussion forum.
Then, after you have a contentious public debate with someone you barely know, your actual friends and acquaintances on FB are repeatedly encouraged to go read the exchange. And since you were talking to that person so much, FB's algorithm reasons it means you must like them a lot, so your news feed starts telling you about everything the person you were arguing with is doing.
To an extent, I think that's a good thing. It keeps challenging points of view in my feed. If I ever found someone truly abusive, I'd block them. But that's never happened to me. As I said elsewhere, my discussions can get pretty heated, but I try always to be respectful.
At the end of the day, I'm more concerned with how my point of view appears to lurkers than to someone I'm debating. I'm unlikely to change that person's mind in any given convo.
I don't know if it's my age/class/nationality/background or what, but there is no way in hell I would participate in any serious discussion on a platform like facebook, both because they're using that data, and because it's notionally attached to my identity.
Indeed, the main reason to have an account there now is to avoid the "you don't have a facebook account" judgement.
The thought people would put themselves out there like that strikes me as being incredibly privaledged or incredibly naive...
Completely agree. Associating my actual views with my real identity makes me uncomfortable as well - not so much concerned about what Facebook would do with that data, more concerned with the fact that it will cause people I know or have a strong chance of meeting to dislike/hate me for a reason that I'd rather not give them.
Also, having a "debate" over FB sounds only moderately more pleasant than having a debate in the comments of a Youtube video.
I don't do it because it's pleasant. In fact, it's often really stressful. I do it because I think it's crucial, in the same sense that I think any sort of political or social engagement is crucial.
As far as the risk of people hating me, I try really hard to always be respectful of people I debate with. I think for that reason, I've been able to keep friendships with people I regularly have some pretty intense disagreements with.
Yep, I am incredibly privileged to be able to do so. But I also know that some of the people I interact with wouldn't otherwise have much exposure to a non-strawman version of my point of view that they can actually interact with. At the moment, I think it's probably the most politically effective thing I can do.
I don't necessarily think you shouldn't have strong/ controversial conversations.
Indeed, growing up, that was pretty much what the internet provided me: both a way to be exposed to new ideas, to challenge others, etc, and a way out of the stiffling intellectual backwater that was highschool/suburbia.
But, "back in my day", we did it privately. Anonymously. We had handles/aliases. In person friends had conversations in person. On the internet, you operated behind your handle/alias. And you better believe that your real name and identity was almost never voluntarily connected to your handle/alias.
I had people that I'd known for years, whose real names I still don't know, and I'm never going to.
The "idea" of being simultaneously identified by your real name, using a public corporate for-profit communication system that has a memory and saves your communications, and having contentious conversations are ideas that are so absolutely alien to me I sometimes still have to kick myself that some people are doing it.
It's like old people who click on ads, or open attachments in emails: why would you even do that!
I think the ability to debate pseudonymously is very important. But I think it's also totally reasonable to do so under your real identity, if you feel comfortable. Lots of people blog, for example. In many ways, Facebook serves much the same purpose as a blog to me, but with better discourse.
Also, real identity carries weight in a discussion because you're socially accountable for your views and conduct. Now, again, I'm privileged to hold views that are socially, politically, and professionally acceptable in the spaces I inhabit,even if they're not often fully shared. But I also don't think that's coincidental.
What's wrong with being identified with your beliefs?
Using aliases is rarely really anonymous, you can probably infer my identity pretty easily.
One can be above if one chooses, it's seems ultra-paranoid to want to discuss nothing unless you're anonymous - what do you talk about then in social situations IRL, do you wear a mask when you go out?
> What's wrong with being identified with your beliefs?
Depending on what your beliefs are, maybe nothing.. for now. However, if government or corporate interests decide that your beliefs are an issue for them at any point in the future, having them permanently stored could become an issue for you in the future.
Well, like all social things there are degrees. One obviously has the option to talk about things pseudo-anonymously, indeed that's what my handle here at hn is, but there are levels of effort and plausible deniability involved in connecting that handle to my actual identity.
But in doing so, one is talking about topics that one feels relatively safe about: either because one is expressing opinions that are in some ways culturally mandated, or which are so trivial one doesn't view them as controversial, or because one holds a social position whereby even though those views are contentious one feels they have enough social power to get away with expressing them.
But we don't have a perfect idea of what is deemed contentious in the future or what future contexts will be, so if you're not in a position of relative social power, and are assuming you're going to stay in that position for the plausible future, you're taking massive risks...or alternately your not really discussing very controversial opinions.
I'm lucky, in that I don't have anything that society currently views as a strong negative and I'm now in a relatively powerful position, but even I have to wear a "social mask" when I go out because my brain doesn't seem to work like most people's, and common topics of conversation dont really interest me.
But imagine others, or even me hypothetically investigating opinions I don't necessarily agree with. Indeed, back at university, for example, I attended various religious groups and meetings: I was interested from an anthropology perspective, but if someone had taken my name out and associated me with that group, that might kiss goodbye future employment.
And what about other groups and genuinely controversial opinions: gay men in religious communities, women in Saudi Arabia, minorities and ethnic groups, drug users, pirates, criminals, anarchy/communist/separatists/far right groups, fetishists and swingers, racists and religious fundamentalists (again, I did some work on the latter back at university). Even being interested in such topics in any serious fashion is enough to raise a bit of "social suspicion" from a social capital perspective...
This is my experience. I live on the outskirts of my very large city. Most people are near the core, or live in the exact opposite direction of me on the other side of the city because it's cheaper there. I don't have classes with my friends, who go to other universities or are in different programs. If I didn't have a social media platform I would literally never talk to these people. But, instead of using Facebook to "share my life", I post articles and discussions I find interesting or relevant, which sparks healthier discussion on the platform. Most of my time on Facebook is spent catching up with still-good friends in messenger. I also keep my friend count low-- I have around 50 people on Facebook, all of whom I have spent a significant amount of time with in the past, all of whom I enjoy as people.
I think it's all about how the platform is used. Yes, it's designed to be addictive, but the less friends you have added, the less notifications you will receive daily. If one doesn't post many personal details, or does not document their life on their timeline, one can avoid most of the data-grabbing. I have two photos of me showing my face. I close the Facebook tab when not in use, and check it once a day. If no one has messaged me I close the tab again. I don't check Facebook on my phone.
As a sidenote, having HN as a source for "distraction" has helped me significantly. I check this site in the morning and learn something new everyday. But it doesn't feel like "work", it feels like a "break", similar to the feeling Facebook once gave me but without the guilt.
> Surely there’s a way to keep these relationships alive outside of the system!
Yes: RSS and/or email lists. I have a blog and email client, but I also know some people who wouldn't use those things. It sucks, but that's the way things are now.
Maybe those people should know someone who doesn't use Facebook, instead of you thinking you're forced to use Facebook because they won't use something else.
We share video with grandparents, for example, you could do it by links sent over email but social-media is easier. I used to use YouTube, but Facebook upload is easier and privacy controls are easier for me.
We get to see them about twice a year because of cost and distance of travel.
I do not understand why, but since quitting Facebook 6 months ago, I have experienced being better in touch with many friends. More of them reach out to me directly and the conversations feel more meaningful. Of course, this is only anecdote but it has been pretty surprising. I did leave Messenger on my phone, and I’m not sure if I will want to remove it, largely because I did move a year ago and am about to move again.
Of course, I'm not at all sure the benefits I've gotten have any resemblance to most peoples' experience on Facebook, and plenty of reason to believe that this isn't the case. And there's no way in hellllll I'd give my daughter a Messenger for Kids app.