Facebook Friends: Reader Reactions

What makes Facebook such a lightning rod for reaction? My article last week on Facebook Friends unearthed quite an array of responses, from those agreeing, to those who think I am the Luddite's Luddite.

People responded from the UK, various parts of the EU, Australia and all across North America. The responses ranged from civil to vulgar; some were thoughtful arguments, some asked for greater depth, and some were somewhere between ignorant and ill informed.

Even though I wrote that this is just the start of a series, some reacted as though a travesty of justice had taken place. Some are so steeped in the internet world of SMS, texting, and abbreviated messages that an engaged conversation seems impossible.

Last week, I said we would be looking at communication in more depth as the series unfolds. For now, please allow me the latitude to say that communication is one of those massively misunderstood terms, one that can mean anything from the sharing of minor bits of information to one of complex substance and meaning.

Additional context for this series of articles can be found in an earlier post about the difference between what people often pursue in life (Symbols vs. Experience). You may also find my post about communication to be useful.

Some reader perspectives:

Scott from NYC put it most succinctly: The quick answer on Facebook or any social media platform is that they are tools that you can use well, or poorly. The question isn't about Facebook, it's about how people use it and what they hope to experience as a result.

Indeed, as with any tool, Facebook can be used well, and it can misused in many ways as well. A useful and insightful lens through which to view the discussion on Facebook and how people use it might come from the psychologist, Abraham Maslow who wrote: If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see all problems as nails. In a similar but more useful vein, he is also quoted as saying: He that is good with a hammer tends to think everything is a nail.

What is the experience that you are looking for in your FB communications? The more clear you are on the outcome you are seeking, the more skillfully you can choose which hammer to use.

From the several hundred comments and email messages I have received, it would appear that some of the most popular ways people use Facebook include:

1. Staying in touch with friends in different locations, countries
2. Finding lost friends
3. Exchanging info on interesting new books, movies, shared interests
4. Staying current on contact information
5. Engaging in dialogue around topics such as politics, technology
6. Simple entertainment
7. Advertising and marketing, personal, professional and commercial
8. Information and discussion forum for issues ranging from job search and the economy to healthcare and alternative therapies
9. Posting pictures for purposes as diverse as sharing with friends, personal ego needs, and professional career advancement

Some FB devotees deplore older users while some welcome the vehicle to stay in touch with extended families. Some denounce "the trendies" who came because FB is/was hot and then "keep moving on and are at Twitter right now."

Many said that there really isn't any difference in online communication tools - they're just tools that make simple, perhaps simplistic, communication more readily available. Some wrote that exchanging Facebook messages is preferred because unlike meeting someone in real life, or even talking on the phone, you can more easily get out of a conversation you don't want to continue.

Many noted that long distance relationships are easier to maintain with FB or some other social networking tool, while others thought email was better. In this reference, it would appear that the nail is the same (communicating over a distance), and some people prefer different kinds of hammers.

Some claim Facebook is a distraction and write extensively about how much time they keep wasting diving back to see the latest post about someone's movie choice last night or party tonight. Of course, even if someone is distracting themselves from life, that's not Facebook's fault.

But that's a great issue to examine. If someone complains about how distracting or devoid of meaning they find FB, are they talking more about the tool, or how they are using it?

If you or someone you know seems to be wasting time using FB, becoming continually distracted, or otherwise find the experience less than satisfying, then a better question might be: What need are you trying to fulfill? (Symbols vs. Experience).

Gabe offered some nice insights when he wrote:

Facebook doesn't replace real world interaction for most people. There are at least four ways that it can actually enhance real world interaction:

1. Getting reacquainted with an old friend or finding a new friend in an old acquaintance. For example, a guy I went to high school with ran in very different circles from mine back then and we barely knew each other, but since connecting on Facebook we found we share a similar sense of humor, similar interests, and a similar worldview, and we've spent time hanging out IRL that never would have happened otherwise.

2. Maintaining contact info: There are only so many people I am close enough with to maintain phone numbers and email addresses as people move and whatnot. For the rest, Facebook makes keeping track of contact info so much simpler.

3. Getting the small talk out of the way: One of the things I hate most about parties or other situations where you see people you haven't seen in a while is the ritual of comparing notes on employment, relationship status, recent travels, etc. Facebook takes care of all this, so when you see that person who is a Facebook "friend", you can get right into the real conversation.

4. Stimulating deeper conversation: Some people, myself included, are naturally inclined towards being reserved in novel social situations (read: shy). If you're at a party and you're shy, the chances of getting beyond even the shallowest small talk can be pretty slim. But if you've been emboldened by the exhibitionist format of the Facebook interface, you'll already have revealed things about yourself that invites people's curiosity, and you'll be more likely to have a more interesting, and more intimate, conversation.

Eric wrote:

I've been on and off Facebook a number of times because it's mostly just chit-chat. You have to work at it, just like you have to work at any normal conversation with someone. I've finally come to the conclusion that for long distance relationships, with people I don't see very often, and when I want to draw other people into the conversation, its lots of fun.

For me it's not about the number of friends I have, but the number of friends who actually communicate.

From Matt, a sophomore at a North Carolina university:

Everyone I know around my age has a Facebook account, with more and more of the older generations I know hopping on board - it was shocking at first to be friended by my grandfather. Even the most anti-social and reticent of my friends have Facebook accounts that they maintain.

Facebook allows you to have real time communication with whomever you please, provided they are also online, and browsing the site. But then I realized that even though you can have a "conversation" through Facebook (and I have countless times, sometimes lasting hours), I have found that as you get less and less attached to the person you're talking to, the less any real communication gets through.

When typing you don't have any fluctuations in tone, volume, etc. It's extremely hard to convey happiness, sarcasm, teasing, sadness, etc. just through typing. I've often thought that the invention of emoticons in typing is not just an internet meme that was spontaneously developed by nerds fooling around with keyboards, but actually fills a very real need to convey emotions when it would otherwise be very difficult to do so by any other means. I've also wondered if phones don't do the same thing to us on a more limited level, due to the person on the other end not being able to interpret any facial expressions or body language.

Clearly, there are multiple needs and multiple ways to fulfill those needs. Ultimately, where I am headed with this series is an exploration of what drives the need to communicate in the internet age using internet tools. More importantly, I'm hoping we can explore the difference between the experience of communication and the tools we choose.

As last week, please do post your thoughts here as comments or drop me an email with your thoughts, counterpoints, alternatives or suggestions. My one request is that we try to stay civil in the process.

***

You can find out more about Russell Bishop at http://www.lessonsinthekeyoflife.com. Contact Russell at: [e-mail]
.
The author of Lessons in the Key of Life, Russell is an Educational Psychologist, professional life coach and management consultant, based in Santa Barbara California.

Comments

[skippyB]

What drives all of this?
Two things:
Desperation
Hubris

[oakley9]

I prefer the telephone to have a more meaningful one-to-one conversation.

[deepfreezevideo]

Best comment yet!

[randomx6]

I have always loathed the telephone. Unlike actually seeing people which is fun and usually scheduled, and unlike internet communication, it is deeply intrusive, can go off at any time, and is hard to ignore.

[waitforme]

How is a telephone conversation 'deeply intrusive'? If you ask the person you call if this is a good time for a chat and accept no for an answer if it is not, how is it intrusive?

What is 'can go off at any time'? Who cuts it off? What kind of phone do you have that will 'go off'? What means 'going off'?

[LMPE]

In my opinion, Facebook mainly functions as a means to stay in touch with friends with whom I had lost contact over the years.

[deepfreezevideo]

Same here.
FB has proven useful in finding old friends.

[waitforme]

How do you 'find old friends'? Do you type in their names? Do you let them come to you? How does this happen? Someone told me recently that she was surprised to find so many people from the past. Did she type in all their names -- or what? (I forgot to ask.)

[VoteOnPaper]

As a naturalist (bird watcher, botanist, biology, zoology), the really cool thing is to have other naturalist friends on FB who post their wildlife sightings as spring progresses. Knowing generally where people live, the mental map in my head lights up as migrations head north. It's fun to celebrate the changes and lucky chances folks have with rare flora and fauna. I wish more naturalists and nature enthusiasts would join FB and share the experience.

[bikerdude]

I was a late arrival to facebook simply because I value my privacy. But one of my daughters got me to set up an account and now its almost overwhelming. I'm in touch with many people from various part of my life from family to ex co-workers to clients. Its interesting when you get one of those, "How do you know her?" comments..­.

[camb94]

I would also like to point out that it is a great way of staying friendly with people that you no longer consider friends. Without having to "end" a friendship, you can maintain FB contact and drift away naturally. I have found old friends that I never thought I would hear from again, and for that alone, it has been worth it. I don't spend much time on it because I never have that kind of time, so in some ways, I can't really get that involved. But the 2 things I will always be grateful for are: 1. Finding old friends, and 2. Illustrating that some people who you thought were friends, really aren't -- and in a way that I now have control of the relationship, or at least how I respond to it.

[realitybites2]

Facebook is yet another card in an ever growing arsenal that we have to establish, maintain and grow relationships. It will never be a replacement for the other cards in the relationship deck - most notably "in person" however it certainly is convenient for maintaining those outer circle relationships that are so difficult to maintain for busy city dwellers like myself.

[Shebeezies]

I love facebook, hate twitter. I find people I actually KNOW on facebook, while Twitter seems populated by strangers looking to get you to their blogs or businesses.

I've reconnected with so many long lost friends and relatives on facebook. I find the little quips WONDERFUL insight into their real personalities and daily lives. Before, it was big catch ups at holidays ... so and so had a baby, so and so got married ... I'm in college now, etc.

[DennyCrane]

Russell, what I find interesting is how defensive people get about Facebook. I've seen people get angry and lash out, as if you've offended them. If I'm a fan of a certain sport and someone else says they're not, that they don't see the appeal, and don't understand why I'm a fan, I might try to explain it. But if I still can't, I won't be insulted that they're not a fan. But fans of Facebook take it personally. Like you said, you can't judge a tool by the way people use it. In the early days of the internet, a lot of people used it just to look at porn. Does that mean the internet was useless? Of course not. Likewise, Facebook's value comes from how you use it. But what folks like myself who aren't heavy FB users take issue with is precisely how people use it. Sure it makes life more convenient, but at what cost? I know people who don't make the effort to meet with their friends because they feel like they can catch up with them online. I also think true friendship can be measured by whether that person will really be there for you when you need them or whether you'll be there for them. To me, many of these Facebook friends people collect are just pen-pals, people you can write to, but nothing beyond that.

[Russell Bishop - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Denny: great to see your comments, as always. You should see some of the vitriolic email I have received - well, maybe it's good that you haven't! Surely something that produces so many different responses with so much emotion attached must be hitting pretty close to something very important. The good news about the level of response, is that we may be able to find our way to the deeper, more meaningful core issues that are present here. I suspect the underlying message is about depth and meaning, both the presence and absence thereof. I read the NYT piece today about teen texting, and can't help but wonder at the level of need being expressed by someone who sends 80+ text messages a day, let alone the person who has been sending nearly 500 a day!

There's so much more here - I only hope I can find a way to bring to light the depth that is being sought after.

Thanks again for your always thoughtful contributions.

[DennyCrane]

Russell, I think we agree that it's the quality of the connections that matters. People can reconnect with people all over the world using Facebook. But how deep are those connections? I don't have a huge circle of friends and I prefer it that way. Not because I don't like people, but because I value quality, not quantity. In today's fast-paced world, we feel more alone than ever and we're all craving connection. Facebook and Twitter allow us to connect with so many people we might not otherwise have met. But I personally don't feel any less alone just because I've amassed hundreds of friends. To me, collecting friends on Facebook or Twitter is like having subscribers to my newsletter. Sure it's flattering that people are paying attention to what I write, but if they suddenly stopped, should it change the way I look at myself? Not if I have healthy self-esteem. Maybe that should be the subject of your next article. Imagine the vitriol you'd receive then.

[Diogenis]

I mostly find FB a useless way of communicating and just another social trend like twittering. I communicate with acquaintances and friends all over the world via Messenger Live with voice and at times a camera. My second choice of communicating is Yahoo Messenger. I also still like sending emails to my friends and acquaintances. I like also taking the time with friends and loved ones to write an actual letter and send greeting cards. I am an individual that definitely makes a distinction between "acquaintances" and "friends"! And for me..true friends are few and rare. I am not interested to have a large list of friends to send one liners to. In many ways, I feel our society and world is losing the capacity to communicate on a personal level. I travel frequently to other countries and have observed social behavior lacking. Even when socializing, people are obsessed with their cell phones. I still get people that know me inviting me to Facebook, yet, they too agree with me in preferring Messenger Live or Yahoo Messenger. I have much I can write on the subject of socializing and communication.

[Russell Bishop - Huffpost Blogger]

And thanks again to you Diogenis. I always welcome your thoughtful additions to the dialogue.

[waitforme]

There is nothing like an actual letter. Where you can sit down and thoughtfully convey your thoughts, your questions, your reminiscences, whatever. You write because you miss someone. You write to have a conversation, to feel the person is next to you. The time it takes to write the letter is an experience of being with the person you are writing to. You get a response some days or weeks later, but the conversation goes on. You keep in touch. You make a connection which is rich and valuable. You learn to write.

And at the end, you have the letters to look at and remind you what you said. (You, the writer, are owners, in copyright law, of your own letters.) Your descendants have a record of a lot of your life. This is very important. For historians and for one's own family. And for you, when you get a chance to re-read what you said. But most important, for your correspondent, who loves to get a letter in the mail!

[bunnylogic]

Good God Russel, please just let it go!

[Russell Bishop - Huffpost Blogger]

Sorry, Bunny - just a Bishop here. OK - so I only know bad jokes.

Clearly, the subject stirs a wide range of responses and reactions. To me, there is an underlying need for greater intimacy being expressed by a large number of FB users. If the subject is not for you, why read about it in the first place? That's meant as an earnest question, not an internet put down. Is there something you would rather explore? Love to hear from you.

Best to you!

[Anne Naylor - Huffpost Blogger]

Thank you, Russell, I am fascinated how this line of discussion has opened up to the purpose and intent behind our communications. It is not about the tool we use, but the outcome or experience we seek. That makes a lot of sense to me.

The question is perhaps: what do you really want? Which tool will best achieve it? These days it seems to me we have a rich abundance of tools at our disposal to fulfill our personal and professional lives.

I am curious to see how this topic evolves.

With love and blessings,
Anne

[Russell Bishop - Huffpost Blogger]

And thanks once again to your insightful approach to these discussions. Your contributions are always welcome and thoughtful.

Blessings to you,

RB