Social media and it's increasing societal damage, answers?

ArchXStanton

It's changed the way we interact, I'd bet it has a lot to do with the increase in anxiety and depression too.

joe40

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I ban the use of phones in my university classes, and I can see the students having issues with not having access to social media for the first few weeks of the semester. They're constantly connected. They'll be in the canteen watching their phones while eating and not talking to the people nearby, or walking down the road while chatting online with social media apps. It definitely affects how people view themselves and the world around them... especially the girls/women with their views on beauty. It's bizarre.. and unhealthy.

Yeah I agree it is having a negative influence. However, is board's not social media?
We're on social media complaining about social media.
There are posters here with 1000s of post that must mean a awful lot of time on this site alone.

Kermit.de.frog

joe40 wrote: »

Yeah I agree it is having a negative influence. However, is board's not social media?
We're on social media complaining about social media.
There are posters here with 1000s of post that must mean a awful lot of time on this site alone.

Boards is a properly moderated and controlled space.

I'm not sure whether it meets the criteria of social media.

Perhaps a mod can clarify?

James Brown

Like any information medium judge what you see and hear based on the source. At the the end of the day if you are listening to randos with no supporting or corroborated facts that's on you. Just because it's on the radio, internet of whatever doesn't make it true. Outside of that social media is a great way to stay in touch.

James Brown

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Boards is a properly moderated and controlled space.

I'm not sure whether it meets the criteria of social media.

Perhaps a mod can clarify?

Facebook and Twitter are moderated.

Kermit.de.frog

Bowie wrote: »

Facebook and Twitter are moderated.

No where near as controlled an environment though.

Also most people use their real names and identities on both.

Not the case on Boreds.

Eric Cartman

retweet / Instagram like culture is a cancer of our time. The damaging image trends that female celebrities engage in, late teens women and women in their 20s emulate are becoming catastrophic for the generation below them. You now have girls barely 13-14 looking into getting lip fillers because all of the older girls have them on Instagram , emulating celebrities who's only talents are taking their clothes off for money.

Then you have drag queen children, the fad of changing genders every week, indoctrination into extremist politics on both sides of the spectrum, the glorification of hard drugs and the 'drug dealer lifestyle' , its never been more present, more repetitive and more pervasive in childrens lives.

In the old days it was pretty easy to keep kids away from 18s rated films glorifying drug use, prostitution etc... Now some of their favourite 'influencers' are prostitutes, drug dealers etc...

Its a race to the bottom.

Bowie

Bowie wrote: »

Like any information medium judge what you see and hear based on the source. At the the end of the day if you are listening to randos with no supporting or corroborated facts that's on you. Just because it's on the radio, internet of whatever doesn't make it true. Outside of that social media is a great way to stay in touch.

That was the older argument with regards the internet/social media/mainstream media... and look whats happened.

People are being spoon fed information, and they have no interest in fact checking. It's no longer just on them, because with social media their reach is much further than a single person alone... and it places too much power/influence within the reach of internet companies who can change the actual use of language. Look at the way the English language has changed over the last twenty years... it's nuts, the "quality" or types of words which have been accepted.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Look at the way the English language has changed over the last twenty years... it's nuts, the "quality" or types of words which have been accepted.

This is a big part of it too.. the language has been damaged.. language that is the basis of society really.. it's no wonder reality is coming undone..

(I'm about to get all biblical now..)
In the beginning was the word..

sheepsh4gger

The solution is to remove all forms of censorship. If you go to a place that isn't moderated there's lots of repulsive stuff there but also there isn't a Sizanne Wojcicki or Mark Zuckerberg selectively censoring what they don't like and pushing agendas that serve them.
I don't get how the modern 'public square' is a corporate censored platform.

Eric Cartman

Deleted User wrote: »

That was the older argument with regards the internet/social media/mainstream media... and look whats happened.

People are being spoon fed information, and they have no interest in fact checking. It's no longer just on them, because with social media their reach is much further than a single person alone... and it places too much power/influence within the reach of internet companies who can change the actual use of language. Look at the way the English language has changed over the last twenty years... it's nuts, the "quality" or types of words which have been accepted.

its pub-man / barstool news , the difference is now its worldwide, its hitting vulnerable demographics like teens that it never impacted before and a few friends sharing something fake makes it easier to digest as the 'truth' in peoples minds. peer pressure and repetition have become the barometer for truth. Its a sad state of affairs and allowing websites funded by advertisers to be the arbiters of truth is a mistake our societies will pay for dearly.

Jurgen Klopp

coinop wrote: »

https://twitter.com/_shinhead/status/1267950232807104512

Seems a thinly veiled if you're not actively and loudly with us you are against us statement there

sheepsh4gger

sheepsh4gger wrote: »

The solution is to remove all forms of censorship. If you go to a place that isn't moderated there's lots of repulsive stuff there but also there isn't a Sizanne Wojcicki or Mark Zuckerberg selectively censoring what they don't like and pushing agendas that serve them.
I don't get how the modern 'public square' is a corporate censored platform.

But shur what will that do to the signal to noise ratio?.. That's pretty much the situation now and there's just so much horsesh1t..

I think maybe if TV news wasn't allowed be opinion again, and had to commit to factual information, but it's probably too late for that even..

sheepsh4gger

sheepsh4gger wrote: »

The solution is to remove all forms of censorship. If you go to a place that isn't moderated there's lots of repulsive stuff there but also there isn't a Sizanne Wojcicki or Mark Zuckerberg selectively censoring what they don't like and pushing agendas that serve them.
I don't get how the modern 'public square' is a corporate censored platform.

Except that removing all forms of censorship means removing all moderation too. That's going to allow every piece of hate and bile to be promoted. Actively recruiting impressionable youth to join groups with dodgy agendas.

The problem is that with the advances in marketing and psychology, people are more susceptible to being conditioned.... and those tactics are available to all groups already.

As a previous poster suggested, I wouldn't be against the shutting down of most social media services. There are aspects of the great firewall of China which are appealing (I've lived under it for a decade, and there are positives in addition to the obvious negatives). But if the internet could be returned to a information reserve, that would be optimum in my eyes.

joe40

Jurgen Klopp wrote: »

Seems a thinly veiled if you're not actively and loudly with us you are against us statement there

That is silly but the tweet got two likes. No societal change coming from there.

maccored

social media isnt the problem - its humans. social media lets you witness humanity at both its best and its most delusional, paranoid, stupid ignorant worst. its peoples attitudes need changing

James Brown

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

No where near as controlled an environment though.

Also most people use their real names and identities on both.

Not the case on Boreds.

All Boards, FB and Twitter have is an email.
I'd say Boards has more to do with individuals idea of what goes, which can differ greatly sometimes Mod to Mod, whereas FB and Twitter would rely more heavily on corporate guidelines.

ILoveYourVibes

Very few people use social media these days.

ILoveYourVibes

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Very few people use social media these days.

Any research to back up such a bizarre claim?

maccored

maccored wrote: »

social media isnt the problem - its humans. social media lets you witness humanity at both its best and its most delusional, paranoid, stupid ignorant worst. its peoples attitudes need changing

All very well and good, but dealing with social media is a far cry easier than reforming peoples behavior.

Especially as the society we live in is encouraging the reduction of boundaries and behavioral norms. Most traditional taboos and customs designed to keep people within limited behavior have been removed, diminished or discredited.

ILoveYourVibes

Deleted User wrote: »

Any research to back up such a bizarre claim?

https://www.thedrum.com/news/2020/01/08/why-decline-social-media-use-pushing-programmatic-new-channels

https://www.convinceandconvert.com/social-media-measurement/6-unexpected-trends-in-2018-social-media-research/

https://www.emarketer.com/content/average-social-media-time-spent

A lot of activity is really an algorithmic allusion.

Twitter is designed to look much more busy than it actually is. I would say its the same with Facebook.

People expected covid to change that ...i did.

But it seems people working all day online don't want to post online on social media they want to get out.

Some of your own links point to simply people shifting their attention to different apps.

Alternatively:

https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/#:~:text=More%20than%204.5%20billion%20people,since%20this%20time%20last%20year.

"Some of the key takeaways from their Digital 2020 Global digital overview published on the 30th January 2020 are:

-More than 4.5 billion people are using the internet at the start of 2020
-Active social media users have passed the 3.8 billion mark with this number increasing by more than 9 percent (321 million new users) since this time last year.
-Nearly 60 percent of the world’s population is already online, and trends suggest that more than half of the world’s total population will use social media by the middle of this year."

I looked at a variety of other sites, but they all pretty much reflect the information from the link above. So... nah. Your claim is still bizarre. Trends have shifted somewhat, but the numbers are still huge.

sheepsh4gger

Deleted User wrote: »

But shur what will that do to the signal to noise ratio?.. That's pretty much the situation now and there's just so much horsesh1t..

I think maybe if TV news wasn't allowed be opinion again, and had to commit to factual information, but it's probably too late for that even..

If you censor a group of people then they will in turn censor your views when they get in power.



Instead filter out stuff you don't want to see.


The last thing you want to do is validate some group's prosecution complex by banning them. If the Anarchist's Cookbook wouldn't be forbidden nobody would read it.

sheepsh4gger

Deleted User wrote: »

Except that removing all forms of censorship means removing all moderation too. That's going to allow every piece of hate and bile to be promoted. Actively recruiting impressionable youth to join groups with dodgy agendas.

The problem is that with the advances in marketing and psychology, people are more susceptible to being conditioned.... and those tactics are available to all groups already.

As a previous poster suggested, I wouldn't be against the shutting down of most social media services. There are aspects of the great firewall of China which are appealing (I've lived under it for a decade, and there are positives in addition to the obvious negatives). But if the internet could be returned to a information reserve, that would be optimum in my eyes.

What I would do is break up Facebook and Twitter under antitrust laws. It's a clear oligopoly.


The solution is a decentralized system like a crypto currency blockchain.Only then can social media be the modern public square.



>advances in marketing and psychology, people are more susceptible to being conditioned.
That conditioning is how the Zucc makes his money. Remove the corpos and you don't have a conflict of interests.

I think I lived now long enough around tech to see this pattern repeating, it started with Microsoft. There's an inherent conflict of interests. What serves MS often doesn't serve the consumer. Them making more money takes precedence over your ability to even use the system.


>Except that removing all forms of censorship means removing all moderation too. That's going to allow every piece of hate and bile to be promoted. Actively recruiting impressionable youth to join groups with dodgy agendas.



I really don't like this argument. It's always 'protect the children' or whatever. Teach in schools how to recognize fake news, shilling and other forms of propaganda. If someone needs to be patronized to this level they shouldn't be online in the first place.



If say the flath Earthers are in plain sight they make idiots of themselves without having to do anything. If you don't want to see that stuff you can check a filter not to.

screamer

I think many modern advancements have actually driven us backward

social media = more anti social people
Smart phone = dumber people

The more we engage with it, the less we think for ourselves. I just don’t bother apart from boards I am totally disengaged from social media and that’s how it’s gonna stay.

sheepsh4gger

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Very few people use social media these days.

I



Don't use Facebook
Don't use Instagram
Don't use SnapChat
Dont use Google (use duckduckgo.com)
Have all social media icons blocked in pages so they don't track me page-to page.


I only use forums and image boards, the latter more because you don't need to register.


The whole idea behind social media is.
1. To build a profile on you:
- your contacts
- your preferences
2. Sell it to some company
3. Pocket the conversion money when you buy something or vote for someone.


The second thing they do is push agenda that serves them which removes any idea of impartiality.


In the 90s nobody was using their real name on the Internet. There are good reasons not to do that. You're giving data to all kinds of parties that shouldn't have it and will use it against you in some way.


Everything from your browser version to battery level to screen width is used to identify your browsing session accross websites (not mentioning even IP or cookies). The whole system is bad to begin with.

sheepsh4gger

- get people to fill in a survey
- figure out based on psychology why type of personality they are
- pull all of their connections via the Facebook API that willingly exposes too much info on people
- match the psychological profile with a message tailored for that specific type of personality (they have one for every type)



I don't understand how people still use facebook. Delete your accounts, don't use that trash.

Pauliedragon

As a wise man once said. A person is intelligent, people are idiots. The internet is probably the best and the worst thing to influence humanity since we learned to walk upright.

screamer

screamer wrote: »

I think many modern advancements have actually driven us backward

social media = more anti social people
Smart phone = dumber people

The more we engage with it, the less we think for ourselves. I just don’t bother apart from boards I am totally disengaged from social media and that’s how it’s gonna stay.

Ditto. I'd be the same. I do have wechat (full of government spyware) as I live mostly in China, but I don't keep anything personal on my phone, and limit my usage to work activities. My VPN is running constantly, but TBH I don't really trust that it's safe. I'm not particularly trusting of most media these days... but then again, I don't really need it. Arrange to meet someone, and then, do most talking face to face instead.

I see it with my students. Language wise their ability to form coherent and logical arguments has declined considerably over the last decade. They're lazy about doing their own research, often using articles which have done all the groundwork for them. The problem is that many articles interpret statistics to suit the agenda they wish to push... and that's assuming the research/statistics they're using is accurate. They do the same with historical information, relying on articles, without considering the rise of misinformation on the internet. They'll often refer to messages on twitter as being proof of something, simply because someone has a million followers... and so, it must be true. Then look sheepish when the facts don't support the twitter train.

Social media and modern internet usage has made people lazy. They're so quick to have someone else do their thinking for them. They'll accept ideas because it seems to fit with what they want to hear, rather than check all the angles to see the reality from the fantasy. The Gender Wage gap is a great example of this. Even though it's been explained a million times, people will still read an article online with biased information shown, and simply accept the articles reasoning.

Social media and the internet is dumbing down the human race.

Mr Meanor

― Robert Wilensky Quote,

“We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.”