Social media is a disruptive technology. It upset the apple cart of traditional media by giving people a new way to get their news and tailor it to their own individual liking.
Social media has also been disruptive in the way that it distracts us from everyday life. Why bother talking to people over the fence or the person opposite you at the table when you can vent your frustration at the words of a politician on social media so that people you’ve never met can agree with you?
I understand that many people would tell me my stance on social media is wrong, but while I appreciate their fondness for the communication platform, no amount of holding up a brown mess to my nose and telling me it’s PlayDoh will convince me that you’re not fondling shit.
Social media is where we take all the information that we’ve ingested and flush it away to somewhere else in the world for someone else to deal with. We deposit our insipid thoughts into the bowl of Twitter, regard it for a moment to briefly wonder what we’ve been fed, before pressing a button to see the mass disappear from our eyes, never to be seen again.
Facebook is even worse, in that it has provides no character limit to our brain faeces, and that it analyses our shit for someone else to appreciate.
Kind of like how they might think you need more fibre in your diet and as a result you might like this type of Metamucil or opinion from News Corp or Breitbart. Worse still is that they might analyse your shit, and make sure your diet only consists of the same stuff that generates the same texture and smelling shit.
Don’t believe me? Take it from this Youtube clip from TED.
If your experience is anything like mine, you might try to share this YouTube video on Facebook, but find that very few people actually see it. This isn’t to suggest that Facebook is intentionally performing something malicious (despite what conspiracy theorists would theorise), but rather in their effort to make the platform as cuddly as possible, they are breeding a one-eyed userbase.
Which politicians would love, by the way. I mean, why have people evaluate policies on their merits when they can have petty tribalism instead?
Social media, from what I can see, only serves to pump in shit from other peoples’ toilets into one ginormous pool of indecipherable waste. I guess you could technically call social media a sewerage treatment plant, except I’m dubious that there’s any efforts to clean it.
There is often a lament that readers of news don’t look beyond the headline, so I would then question why people would elect to digest news on social media which limits its posts to the size of a headline anyway.
There are other arguments that some might offer, but they are summarily dismissed in the below clip (which also mysteriously didn’t show up for many of my friends when I posted it to Facebook).
I quit social media for 12 months recently, and as a result I wrote a couple stories, and found that my anxiety reduced significantly. Whenever I see a news story which covers the reaction from twitter, instead of reading the quips from people, I roll my eyes and ask the void, “How is this news?”
Social media isn’t just a toilet. It is the toilet of toilets. The final toilet to which all other toilets lead.