Why we share on social media, and why I’m reining back
Facebook recently announced yet more changes in the way that we organise our relationships on its social network. It’s making it easier for us to group friends into lists and from there decide what we’re going to share with each group. It should help us control our privacy more.
For me it couldn’t come sooner because, much to my surprise, recent events have made me realise that my life on Facebook and other social networks was just too public.
I’ve been an active user of social networks for years; I developed a social networking website, originally called JewishNet 13 years ago. I’ve been actively using Facebook for the past five years, Twitter for three and Google+ since it launched earlier this year.
Sometimes my friends have complained that I “take over” their Facebook or Google+ homepage because of the volume of content I share, both professionally and personally. But no more.
Some events in my personal life recently made me sit back and question, really for the first time, why we post what we do and what it’s telling us about the way we think and live our lives.
For a few years, I’ve worried that social networks can be a distraction from real life, can reduce our productivity and potentially warp the way that we understand friendship. But I’ve also seen how good Facebook can be at helping build and maintain real friendships and organise real world socialising. It’s so much easier and informal to exchange Facebook details with someone you meet at a party than exchanging phone numbers and then seeing that person’s Facebook profile.
All that’s great, but slowly but surely your list of “friends” grows. People you went to school with, people from university, old work colleagues, your ex’s friends, some bloke you met at a party and so on.
I think this has made us change the nature of friendships. Obviously, we all have various degrees of friendship. I know who my close friends are and I speak to them in real life, not just on Facebook. But should we be sharing our intimate thoughts and images with this wider group of “friends”?
And then there’s the images themselves. It’s hard to remember a world before photos on Facebook.
It’s become routine when we go on holiday, have a party or a new baby is born to quickly upload all the photos of said occasion straight there. It’s probably part of the reason for the boom in digital cameras.
Once we upload the photos, we tag everyone in them, not only sharing with our friends the said event but their friends also. Again, all too often without thinking first.
I was trying to deconstruct why I do it. I’m not afraid to say that I’m at least a little vain, I wouldn’t appear on television if I wasn’t. But on a first glance that accounts for a tiny proportion of the 750m people on Facebook. So my reasons must be pretty similar to large number of those users who upload photos and change their status updates all the time.
I guess it’s because actually, it is a little like being on television. Because being on Facebook (and other social media) is a bit like being a celebrity. Spotted (or tagged) at places you have been; photographed at parties in various states of intoxication; your future plans (events) publicised in advance and your innermost thoughts known to people who barely or don’t know you. It’s a bit like ‘The Truman Show’, except in my case, it’s ‘The Benjamin Cohen Show’.
The “Like” button (or +1 on Google) shows you when your “friends” appreciate something you’ve said, somewhere you’ve been or something you’ve done.
The comments give even more detailed feedback, “you look great”, “that’s so funny”, “I’m literally LOLing!” Some of even us measure our worth in terms of the number of “Likes” something has achieved. “Amazing number of likes over this” I’ve heard more than once in conversation.
It’s feeding our ego but it’s also normalising what is still very new behaviour. It lulls us into a false sense of certainty and habit that can go wrong. Behaviour that can upset the friends who you might “tag” at a location or “tag” in a photo. The actions that you take without realising first the ripple effect of consequences of your own behaviour. I’ve done it and I’ve been upset at the photographs and location tags I’ve found being broadcast to everyone I know.
I came out of a really long-term relationship a few years ago. We’d been in a relationship long before Facebook and so when it came along, by default, I was “in a relationship” with him. But when we split up, I simply removed the relationship part of my profile, while his went to “single”.
It’s hard to express how hurtful it is to see a load of people you know clicking “like” when they see that news. I saw the same recently when a few of my friends split up. It’s slightly disturbing and it’s something we’ve not encountered as a society before.
So what have I done about it? I considered culling my Facebook friends list. But then I thought that would be rude, and you never know why you might want to get in contact with someone again. Sometimes it is nice to hear genuine news, such as someone is getting engaged or having a kid.
I thought about trying to convince everyone I know to move to Google+ so that I could easily place them in different circles or friendships. But then of course, not everyone would join.
So, inspired by Google+, I’ve gone through my list of “friends” and divided them into different circles. Circles that I’d share everything with, circles that I’d share some things with and circles I’d mainly share pieces of content available elsewhere, such as my blog or the Channel 4 News website.
But I’ve also done something else; I’ve stopped sharing as much, full stop. I used to post things like “having a bad day” on Twitter, I’m not any more. I guess I posted these sorts of statuses to feel good that 20 or so of my 9,000 or so followers would say “hope you feel better”.
I used to share photos of all sorts of things on Facebook, not any more. Of a recent holiday, I’ve shared 4 out of 100 or so photos.
I’m not suggesting that everyone else should do the same, but I’m suggesting that quite a few people might, many have already. Mark Zuckerberg has always said the world would be a better place if it was more open.
I’m suggesting that sometimes the world might be a better place if it was more private.
Follow @benjamincohen on Twitter.
There are 27 comments on this post
As ever, very well put and you are, again, ahead of the curve – people will find their own comfort levels in the various media, hopefully despise the efforts of those seeking to monetise everything. Your words and practice offer guidance to many.
I do hope that you continue to express yourself in whatever medium suits you best
I understand exactly what you are saying. For a self employed person I am being contacted by clients several times a day for updates. I’m only now getting to grips with how to manage my online presence.
I reckon there may be an opportunity for a new industry where you can employ someone to manage your online presence.
This industry already exists, Emmanuel.
@Steve Masters, yeh I suppose it does, but I was thinking about a company who who can be trusted to blog accurate information without using black/grey hat technologies, or who isn’t based in India and who doesnt want loads of cash. I was quoted by a company £60 an hour!!
So I suppose the balance is about how to be social as possible without being completely accessible and generate leads/interest in what you are offering. This probably sounds rambling, but it would be nice to have two of me where one does the work and the other does the online reputation management bah!
I know what you mean Emmanuel. No one can replicate your personality though. Either you want to be a social networker as you oryou don’t do it at all.
You could try cloning yourself but as Michael Keaton found out in Multiplicity it isn’t a great idea.
@Steve Master you hit the nail. It is difficult to know the limits, but after reading this blog I looked again at my FB profile and now I yuse the lists more effectively. Ive seen some really good examples of social networking and some lousy ones.
I neede 48 hours in the day and lots of me and wine!
Nicely reasoned Ben. I have always been of the opinion that social networks, Facebook especially, are dangerous ground for those who don’t stop to think just how public it is (even when they think it’s private) and of the ramifications.
The rule I follow is that anything posted online should be information that can be shared without equivocation or just stuff posted for the enjoyment of posting it. Anything personal that could become gossip and that you would regret sharing openly should be avoided.
There are many people who don’t draw that line and they will happily complain about their boss, whinge about their family or admit to looting shops – because they think only their close and trusted friends are reading.
I solved this problem. I opened a Facebook account in a false name! Honestly, it works a treat. I store my photos on there but, ones without tags or ID of people. I set them to ‘me only’ in the privacy settings too.
I can follow any other Facebook user and keep up to date on issues and comment without being stereotyped by relatives. I’m not judged by how many friends I have and nor do friends and relatives know what I do or don’t like.
It’s a great way and stops any vanity!
Twitter is the same. I occasionally change my account by closing down the previous. That way it stops nosey bast**ds tracking your opinions! (I get a bit antagonistic on issues that cause inequality, poverty & elitists club corruptions, as you might have seen on my blog postings!)
I’m not so happy to know that once you close ‘ya Facebook account down, the photos you loaded up are not auto removed from other peoples albums.
I’m also not happy the Twitpic takes rights to your photo uploads too!
The bottom line is this, share too much at your own peril. Step back and if in doubt, leave it out. There was a time before social media!
To be balanced and fare, social networking has many advantages…
I tend not to share personal things. Most of my facebook notes are links to Channel 4 or the Guardian, trying to persuade my friends that armageddon really is just around the corner and that Cameron/Osborne really are the devil incarnate in two bodies.
Most of them ignore me.
nuff said
I am disabled and for several reasons cannot use the telephone and, similarly, thus rarely visit friends & family. Since discovering f/b, just over a year ago, I have reconnected with the world outside my door. Even when confined to bed and too ill to have visitors, I can still socialise. I should not wish to return to my pre-f/b days & ways.
Privacy is an issue with f/b, Ben is spot on there: but I have set nearly all my settings to the strictist or customised. I do worry about folk uploading children’s piccies that might be ‘mishandled’: but I suppose it is up to parents to ensure they also have set strict privacy settings.
I have made new friends, not simply acquaintances, via the internet, with whom I have met up in the ‘real’ world. However, I have not made any new friends via f/b. For some reason I am suspicious of motives. Again, Ben’s sense of pragmatic scepticism is to be applauded and followed.
%)
Also, if anyone cares to read the Facebook terms and conditions, they will realise that when they post anything on Facebook they are effectively assigning complete copyright control to Facebook.
I agree with you Ben, clearly we’re entering an age where new social norms are being forged. The result seems to be millions of casualties who are learning the hard way (add me to that list as well) and clearly something needs to give.
However whilst we should be more selective in our public sharing, should we really limit ourselves as much as you suggest? I can’t help but think that we’ve reached a more open place through social media, and knowing more about the people in my extended social-group might have unexpected benefits in its own right.
Knowing what friends-of-friends like to do/eat/sing/play etc may affect the rapidity of cultural transmission as well as its variation. But whilst the frequency of these outbursts should perhaps decrease, I think even the smallest of announcements can have value in unexpected ways and to unexpected people. It seems to me that only public updating can provide genuine fertility to the soil of social media and if you limit the richness of its content then perhaps it will grow stale.
I am relieved to see that people are starting to look at social networking this way. Obviously it has its benefits but I worry about the way people nonchalantly put anything and everything out there.
What has been a major eye-opener recently was when I stopped facebook; I now don’t appear exist to many people and some ‘friends’ have actually taken offense! I really don’t want to be defined by social networking and certainly don’t want to share my life with so many people. I also really don’t care if so and so is ‘having a bad day’ or heaven forbid – needs a hug!
I enjoyed reading this article, glad to know I’m not the only one that feels this way.
I’ve never been a huge fan of social media at least not for personal use and have gotten rid of pretty much all my social networks.
As much as I didn’t like things like FB I noticed I was sharing more and I too witnessed the whole relationship status thing.
There are positives and negatives of social networking but it’s not really for me being a fairly private person. I felt a sense of release since getting rid of my FB and now Google+ which I never check anyway. As far as staying in contact with the people I care about, they don’t mind regardless of distance they can still email, skype, call or catch up with me face to face.
Ahead of the curve? Madness. The vast majority of people stopped using facebook to tell the world what they were having for breakfast or how they are “feeling” a long time ago. It’s mainly used to communicate (via messages) and send out invites now. This article demonstrates transference to me, you may be acting aloof on your social networks now but it sounds like you still have a hunger to tell the world about yourself and your 9,000 worshippers…
9,000 worshippers? I follow Ben because his reports are focused on technology and his style of writing / presenting appeals to me. No more no less. Please try and keep messages about ideas and not make them personal old boy.
I think this is massively unfair and, without speaking on behalf of Ben, it misrepresents what he’s saying.
Yes, people have stopped updating as much as they used to but my understanding of this post is that we should be more conscientious about who we update to. Hence Google+’s circles feature facilitates this.
My contention is that public updating has established a permanent place in our digital landscape and though we should perhaps increase the quality of each update, we shouldn’t (and I bet we won’t) be stopping any time soon.
I agree that we should use tools like “Circles” to be more specific in to whom we social-spam, but we should definitely still spam away because its intrinsic to the very nature of social media.
At the end of the day, one man’s Tweet is another man’s poison and when people share content online, they should be mindful of this, not restricted by it.
It’s not a personal attack, it’s just ridiculous to broadcast to the world that you are reining in the syndication of your inner most thoughts while broadcasting to the world your inner most thoughts… Seriously. I wouldn’t walk into a pub and tell everyone that I’m not drinking any more while holding a pint.
You made lists of your friends on Facebook so that you can filter their posts and choose who sees each of yours? You’re so 2009!
Benjamin,
You have attained the Age of Reason. Congratulations
Friends are made face to face, in flesh and blood. You cannot make “friends” with a stream of electrons.
Welcome to the real world.
[...] A longer version of the blog was published at Channel4.com. Benjamin Cohen is technology correspondent for Channel 4 News [...]
I’ve read a lot of vile comments relating to this article, esp. on Guardian.
My advice is to take no notice of the weasels. These ungrateful twits don’t deserve an opinion. Perhaps they enjoy an opportunity to dig for other sly reasons?
Ignore the prats.
well said @Anthony Mann!
This is a good read for the opposite view, arguing that publicness is a good thing. http://www.buzzmachine.com/2011/09/14/public-parts-the-introduction/
My grandson started facebook at age 13. He is now 15 and was introduced to another boy his age by a girl the same age on facebook. My grandson is a gifted student at Jefferson High, a self pronounced geek. My daughter, his mother, who couldn’t make it past the 8th grade allowed my grandson to spend the night with a gay boy from facebook and now his life has been altered forever. What can we do to stop children from being abused on facebook?
sorry Shirley,but what has this got to do with Facebook? adolescents have been finding each other for millennia by available means