I do not have Facebook.
The nature of Facebook as a medium of communication can be found on the two words that it compounded: face and book. It combined both oral and literate cultures; the ear and eye; the auditory and visual; the communal and private; and the collective and individual.
Following Harold Innis' terms, the era of orality/face is time-biased: communication is only possible in the actual presence of speaking humans at a particular moment. On the other hand, the era of literacy/books is space-biased: far-flung places are reached even if the material used to convey information cannot last forever.
As Facebook combines the "face" and the "book," our brains are extended in a global embrace to abolish the confinements of time and space. It is a great example of Marshall McLuhan's idea of space-time compression. We can communicate anytime and anywhere.
This technology is truly promising for a cosmic unified consciousness; however, in my opinion, the onus lies on the users. With this immense power, we may still find ourselves in the opposite side of unconsciousness. I have chosen not to use this platform for now.
We often forget that we have a choice. Social media is optional, not mandatory. It even took me a decade to realize that I can delete/deactivate my social media accounts. Mark Weiser articulated the twenty-first century perfectly: "the most profound technologies are those that disappear, as they weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it."
Facebook was invisible to me because it has always been a part of my daily routine. It blurred the boundaries of my social life, professional relationships, academic endeavors, family matters, et cetera, et cetera. Ironically, it is only when I removed it from my life that it became more visible to me.
Do not get me wrong: I am not a Luddite. I am not devaluing Facebook and other social media accounts in a pandemic era. I am not one of those who have a utopian view of past cultures where advanced technologies do not exist. I recognize the gifts of our computers. I just remain a student of the media: I am constantly evaluating the platforms that I am using; I do not register just because most people love it.
This is what works for me, and I am not negatively judging those who have diametrically opposite views. I believe in Ken Wilber's Integral theory; I am not here to dismiss, deny, or debunk the lives of avid social media fanatics. I just have a humble goal of elaborating my perception on social media usage based on my observations and experiences.
Five main reasons why I'm not active on social media:
Productivity in social media is conspicuous. It made communication faster and the reach is extended to a lot of audiences. Scholars also call this scalable sociality: it is now easy to scale messages from the most private to the most public. Just in one platform, we can interact with various group sizes according to our preferences.
However, I have realized that as social media productively removes the limits of global time and space, its effect may backfire on personal time and space. Ironically, a decade of my life was wasted on doomscrolling, and my online space was also intruded with unpleasing posts/stories, fake accounts/news, and unsolicited advertisements/messages.
I agree with McLuhan's idea of auto-amputation: the body part that a technology extends is also, ironically, numbed. Cars extend our bodies to various places, but the feet can no longer walk; our earphones amplify our capability to listen, but the ears are also blocked to sounds in the present environment; and while computers expand information storage, brains are also becoming lazier on seeking and filtering truths.
My priority is to be more in touch with my self – to know more about what thoughts and emotions are really coming from me without any immediate influence/manipulation from external environments. In this case, the overwhelming barrage of notification pings is not helpful. I must tone down my social media usage. There are other practical ways to be in touch with news and current affairs without being implicitly distracted by other unimportant shenanigans.
Sans social media, it is already challenging to be "indistractible!"
One of the positive discourses in the current century is the removal of social stigma on mental health issues. There are many correlation/causation studies exploring the relationship of social media/smartphone usage with loneliness, anxiety, depression, and whatnot.
In my opinion, these issues come from a culture that social media is trying to encourage: a lifestyle where what is hidden must always be shared. It is consistently concerned about what is on our mind and what happened to us. It often encourages us to make the most out of our days through sharing videos, come hell or high water. It always has a space for our stories.
When inner thoughts are constantly outed, the "unconscious" of a society is also illuminated. This predisposition to oversharing makes anxiety an inevitable condition. As everything about everyone's lives are shared without second thoughts, everyone else's negativities are also absorbed. When I used social media mindlessly, I found myself being more concerned with other people's affairs. I was not minding my own business.
I want to be more authentic with who I truly am, to live what I am really experiencing in the present, and to celebrate the actual moment of now. My free time is not "free" if I just grab my phone without any intention. Any mindless thought/emotion that I also express in social media would also make my audiences imprisoned to my unconsciousness. I vow not to use these apps when I am not paying attention, on purpose, in the present moment, non-judgmentally. Kudos to Jon Kabat-Zinn!
According to my intuition, some dearest family and friends who know me well may just attribute my social media inactivity to my introversion. Ha! While it is true that I am an introvert who recharges her energy inwardly, I beg to disagree. The psychology of social media behavior affects extroverts, ambiverts, and introverts alike. In fact, these personality types are hard to distinguish in social media. When I was an active user, I found myself sharing everything, especially those that I cannot personally express outside the online world.
In the real world, I would not broadcast to ALL my family, friends, and acquaintances that I have been in a five-star restaurant abroad, or that I was awarded with Latin honors during my graduation: I may be labeled as arrogant. I would not just burst my ruffled depressed feelings, or my inexplicable fetish for details: I may be negatively judged as annoying and talkative. Of course, I would not also choose to immediately reveal my favorite works of art, hobbies, and idols: not everyone cares.
However, I was an expressive introvert who overshared in social media. I did not even think twice with what I post: I was giving off my privacy, even to acquaintances. I was an idiot who did not realize that my mindless content is not exclusive to people I trust. While I find myself more confident in the online world, I just cannot also deny the fact that I am fearful in planet Earth. Of course, I want my personality to be consistent in both dimensions.
I am hating the cyberstalking culture. I want to give more time on cherishing my relationships in real life. While the online platforms can expand my connections, I have realized that it must only be used as a complement to actual presence in the physical space. I tend to take the immediate availability of all my connections in the online world for granted; I found myself not spending enough time with those who are dearest to me just because I can always interact with them through social media.
The more social media keeps us in touch, the less we also feel connected in reality. Healthy authentic connections would reveal themselves once logged out. I am challenging myself to really "show up" in my relationships, and not to "show off" an inauthentic part of me.
The cost of social media is our attention. These are not just platforms for information and entertainment; these are spinners of time and space, and bearers of power and culture as it connects people and institutions. This echoes Michel Foucault's society of surveillance, not of spectacle.
I was a teen when I created my Facebook account in 2009. It is for free: why would I hesitate to register? I had a fear of missing out. My friends were active on Facebook: other than chatting for hours, we also played FarmVille and Pet Society. I could not see any repercussions for using this platform. It was fun!
In 2018, I had an inkling that Facebook knows a lot about me. The ads that showed up on my account were products/services that I'm truly interested in. I felt like there was a webcam that took a video of my online activities. The Cambridge Analytica data scandal is also a major turn-off. Lessons on media studies in the university suddenly flashed back: I graduated with a degree in Communications, but I was unconscious of my own media behavior.
It dawned on me that we are living in an attention economy. We are the actual products of the media moguls. The services that they offer are free, but it is our viewership/attention that are being sold to advertisers. That is how they thrive. The more time we spend on social media, the higher their income. The last thing that they want is for us to stop clicking and scrolling down. Why would I sell my life to them? I do not want to be distracted from my real priorities.
I still use social messaging apps. I still have the Facebook Messenger app, but my Facebook account is now deleted. It is darn possible to remain connected with loved ones without being unnecessarily distracted. Some users who have more discipline than I opt not to delete their accounts; they schedule a time slot in their day to browse social media. In my experience, I could not do this with Facebook; it is so distracting for me! I could only do this with Instagram. I like the option to hide followers' stories and posts. I can choose what to consume.
Also, I am the only person in the family who does not have a Facebook account. Whenever I need to be connected with some Facebook groups, I ask them to lend their account to me for that matter, nothing more, nothing less. Life hack!
J. Krishnamurti's idea of freedom resonates with me. "To be free is not merely to do what you like, or to break away from outward circumstances which bind you, but to understand the whole problem of dependence… To be free, we have to revolt against all inward dependence, and we cannot revolt if we do not understand why we are dependent."
He also said: "the function of education, then, is to help you from childhood not to imitate anybody, but to be yourself all the time."
In my observation, unhealthy relentless social media usage can be attributed to two main things: (1) technological dependence, and (2) egoic display. Basically, we believe we cannot live without it, and we use it to fill an existential void of justifying our existences through recording/publicizing our experiences.
I am now trying to own my life by not being overly dependent on a tool. I want to live my life to the fullest without being concerned on how I will present it in a public online platform. Through following these principles, I believe, I can be free.
Do not get me wrong: I still find value in sharing ideas, emotions, and stories through the World Wide Web, but I am now doing it without sacrificing my values. It is through the creation of this website. I aim to share ideas without ads, to tell stories outside the infinite scroll, and to live life sans vanity. I maintain it independently, and I pay for it, because my freedom is invaluable. Cheap costs more.
I am also a proud Mindvalley member, and I use the Mindvalley Connections app to connect with enlightened like-minded souls.
Technologies shape us, and we shape it. We must not only be concerned with social media based on the content that it carries, but also with its function as cultural environments that shape our ways of living.
