Using social media

[SoCurious]

In the thread about "Laura's last post", Bo mentions how by posting Laura's article on Facebook she stimulated a discussion among her school friends.

Since I found out that Goldman Sachs has the majority shareholding in Facebook (assuming the source is accurate), I haven't been keen on using it. However, sometimes out of evil comes good.

In the attempt to foster awareness I thought it would be a good idea to promote SOTT and Cassiopaea so I've put the following message on my wall.

What with predictions of the end of the world due to Climate Change, the wars to come in the Middle East, general feelings of uneasiness, the all-too-obvious soon to be economic collapse, many people are wondering "why?". Too many prefer to ignore the signs and hide behind the illusions of their everyday struggles. If you are one of those asking why then perhaps you should look at

sott.net to find the latest news and most up-to-date research,

and if you want to find out what exactly "it's all about" and what is it that is the source of our woes you should read the story Amazing Grace

http://cassiopaea.org/2011/11/07/amazing-grace-acknowledgements-and-introduction/

When you've done reading it, you can take it or leave it. The choice is yours. But I'm betting you'll take it further.

I think that if most of the forum members were to do the same we may be able to stimulate awareness until the tipping point is reached.

 

[Mikey]

When you've done reading it, you can take it or leave it. The choice is yours. But I'm betting you'll take it further.

Well, hopefully. From my experience it seems that not many take it further.

I think that if most of the forum members were to do the same we may be able to stimulate awareness until the tipping point is reached.

Many do already. But one has to be careful. Using social media is a double edged sword and you can hurt yourself if you're not careful.

 

[SoCurious]

But one has to be careful. Using social media is a double edged sword and you can hurt yourself if you're not careful.

Thank you for the warning Data. Very much appreciated.

The state of affairs, most unfortunately, is such that taking some chances is probably more than warranted.

 

[Iron]

I'll give a personal example.
From time to time I'll post links to Sott or EE.org on my facebook page.
Most of the time, they pass incognito, despite the fact that I have over 300 FB "friends" (for band advertising purpose plus real friends).
Last week I posted the awsome article by Anart, and prefaced the post with her phrase:

[quote author=Anart Grey]
There is something deeply - deeply - wrong with the fact that you hear more about Whitney Houston than you do about how much you're paying to fight wars in Afghanistan and Iraq - or how likely a new war with Iran really is. That's why SOTT.net matters.
[/quote]

I was hoping that someone would agree that crying for someone you dont know and not caring for a imminent war is disturbing.
But not only there was a few replies, but they were of this nature:

[quote author=FB friend]
Nothing to worry about. People gives more attention to Withney, 'cause nobody likes to have bad feelings. A war brings bad feelings, Withney after die, makes people remember good moments of her, and trough the music , also remember great moments of their lives. Also, people thinks about everything that is good is going away like MJ and her. So, people starts to rise hope in their hearts wondering about a new Michael Jackson or when a new Withey will rise. People is addict to hope. "Death" brings hope about a "new start". War is just about "ends".
[/quote]

To which I replied-

[quote author=Iron on Facebook]
All very true. However this very addiction to hope, makes people blind to the manipulations and injustice everywere.
The Death of MJ and Withney brings little consequence, if any, for the masses. A war with Iran gives even more probability to an all scale war, given the actual political scenario, with revolutions everywere.
[/quote]

And the final nail on the coffin by my friend:

[quote author=FB friend]

There is no manipulation. People just see what they want to see. If I know that my sis is living on the streets starvin, I would be very sad. But in this right moment there are millions in this situation, and you and me , we dont cry about them, because there are no bonds between those people and us. You just think about injustice when something concerns to you. For a fish , there is no injustice about they living in ocean while men can swimm or walk on earth. Because for the fish, there is no men, untill the moment that they are caught while someone is fishing. You choose the illusion that you want to live. No one is able to manipulate another person.

and remember: if a bomb is drop in Teera and kill thousands, we will still get our bus like everyday and go to work.
[/quote]

I really am at loss at what to say in a non-confrontational manner to him. He throwed at me some pseudo logic and claims bold-faced that is impossible for people to manipulate one another. This is a person who is involved with psychology, and is in a teaching position of a world famous martial arts linneage.

My point is, you can do it Richard, but don't expect too much, or anything out of it. And be aware that it can backfire.

 

[SoCurious]

I really am at loss at what to say in a non-confrontational manner to him. He throwed at me some pseudo logic and claims bold-faced that is impossible for people to manipulate one another. This is a person who is involved with psychology, and is in a teaching position of a world famous martial arts linneage.

It's like we're living in parallel universes. How people can just not see the issues puzzles me. Good luck with being non-confrontational - sounds like he has the edge in a fight :)

Iron, what I'm doing is leading the horses to the water. If just one drinks I'll be happy. Unfortunately I can't lead too many horses and it would be a good thing if all the horses could at least be shown where the water is.

 

[Mikey]

Iron, what I'm doing is leading the horses to the water. If just one drinks I'll be happy. Unfortunately I can't lead too many horses and it would be a good thing if all the horses could at least be shown where the water is.

That's good, but what Iron reported is all too common. You'll have to find a very sneaky way to lead the horses to the water ("wise as serpents, gentle as doves"). If you do it all to obviously you'll be attacked by those who don't want the horses to drink: either involved into emotional discussions or labelled as belonging to a cult by your online 'friends'. Both of it happened to me, so maybe you can avoid that.

 

[SoCurious]

Thank you Data.

I will not be surprised if attacked, so your kind warning is truly appreciated.

 

[luke wilson]

I have a question, I know lots of people on the forum are quite active on social media, in terms of 'getting the word out'. I'm curious though in terms of how this 'exposure' fits into the idea of 'strategic enclosure' and the potential 'kick-back' from the general law?

 

[Yupo]

It's like we're living in parallel universes.

It is!
I avoid Facebook and such. It is easy to waste time there. My 'friends' already think me a nut job, I'd say. I have a page for my office, but never post on there. I forgot the password.

I got included in a small group mailing by a friend. He was posting about something 'out there', carefully pointing out that the researcher was seriously legit with good academic credentials, therefore not a crackpot. I was offended as it was along the lines of some stuff I had discussed with him long ago (theoretical physics arena), only to get that blank look from him that meant we will not discuss your insane ideas. Or maybe he is opening up a bit.

Sometimes I venture back into the society of my old, regular friends. I find that my drift is getting farther and farther away. Just not much to talk about anymore. When I speak my truth, it leaves some of these people speechless. Example might be about my heart going out to the displaced people there, and how it could just as easily be us one day. Although this is face to face, it could just as easily happen on social media. There is a hive mind out there and we are not in it.

 

[Marina9]

I think Facebook can be both used in a good way and a not so good one. I think posting relevant news can contribute, maybe the general percent of your friends on FB won't even bother to read it, but also it may help people to do their own research on various topics and be aware.

There's this article published in SOTT about Facebook, and by the trends spoken this last year saying how people are slowly waking up about the circumstances we are living in..

http://www.sott.net/article/308409-Are-people-waking-up-Facebooks-most-discussed-topics-of-2015-are-surprisingly-devoid-of-fluff

Aside from this topic, i believe social media is taking a toll in our face to face relationships :/ which is very sad, and also something to be aware of.

 

[Turgon]

I have a question, I know lots of people on the forum are quite active on social media, in terms of 'getting the word out'. I'm curious though in terms of how this 'exposure' fits into the idea of 'strategic enclosure' and the potential 'kick-back' from the general law?

From personal experience, the kickback usually comes from when I venture onto someone elses wall or write a comment on an article that has an agenda attached to it or is major disinformation, but has a lot of people supporting or agreeing with it. If I'm not careful with what I say, how I say it, how emotionally reactive I am in the moment, or aware of the type of audience that I'm writing to, there have been times where I've had people go on the "attack". In other words I was in the wrong bar and no one wants to hear it, so leave well enough alone.

However, I think posting up articles on your wall is different in the sense that being externally considerate should be up there as a priority with what you post and how you comment but anyone that is on your friends list has the choice to read or not read it. You are giving them a choice and not imposing it on them, osit, which is where a backlash can occur. Others may see it differently, though.

 

[Keyhole]

From personal experience, the kickback usually comes from when I venture onto someone elses wall or write a comment on an article that has an agenda attached to it or is major disinformation, but has a lot of people supporting or agreeing with it. If I'm not careful with what I say, how I say it, how emotionally reactive I am in the moment, or aware of the type of audience that I'm writing to, there have been times where I've had people go on the "attack". In other words I was in the wrong bar and no one wants to hear it, so leave well enough alone.

However, I think posting up articles on your wall is different in the sense that being externally considerate should be up there as a priority with what you post and how you comment but anyone that is on your friends list has the choice to read or not read it. You are giving them a choice and not imposing it on them, osit, which is where a backlash can occur. Others may see it differently, though.

I agree with Turgon. The way I see it is that your individual facebook profile is your own space. If you post an article or a video that one of your friends dislike, it is of their own free will to choose not to read it. On the other hand, if you proceed to post unwated articles on all of your friends walls, or begin to comment on other peoples status' - it is a breach of free will and lack of external consideration so you could probably expect a backlash in one form or another.

If someone else initiates discussion (or hand out personal attacks) on one of your posts, I am of the opinion that you can also respond in whichever way you see fit, because after all, it is your wall - but still, basic rules of consideration apply ( try to keep up good manners, no personal insults etc).

A few months ago, I posted an emotionally-driven status which pretty much read like this: "If you have changed your profile picture to a french flag then quit being racist, being ignorant of the world around you, grow a backbone and face reality. ALL unnecessary loss of human life is a tragedy, not ONLY white peoples lives". This one garnered a significant amount of negative attention from a few people, about 70 of my "friends" deleted me because of it. I was so angry at the time that awareness of external consideration and how other people might be feeling just went completely out of the window. Looking back I was behaving obnoxiously, arrogantly and frankly quite rude. Openly calling the masses of people ignorant racists is obviously NOT a good way to convey any ideas you are trying to convey, and will potentially drive people away from your original point. So, again, it is always best to try to maintain a certain level of caution when writing your own comments, just to be on the safe side - because if you do make any major silp-ups (like the above scenario), it could cause potential problems in the future.

 

[luke wilson]

As part of 2016, I'm going to start sharing stuff on FB - on my wall, daily. Just 1 or 2 articles.

I noticed that I tend to read other people's stuff which they share, even though I don't comment or like the article. That to me means that by sharing, potentially some of my 'friends' on fb will read some of the stuff but not necessarily comment or like. The more articles I share, the more they associate my sharing with a particular stance (hopefully good!). However, in starting it today, I noticed the following

- Self-censoring myself in terms of what I chose. For one, I didn't feel comfortable putting in stuff about Putin, the western funded war on terror or any other such politically sensitive topics that goes against the mainstream news.

- Worrying about the source of some of the articles I was looking at

In the end, today I shared articles from Chris Hedges (has got a veneer of mainstream credibility) and a psychology today one about Donald Trump. All these articles from SOTT but linked direct to the original source i.e. not SOTT. Eventually I'm hoping to post some SOTT focus articles but all-too worried about the general law.

 

[Marina9]

If someone else initiates discussion (or hand out personal attacks) on one of your posts, I am of the opinion that you can also respond in whichever way you see fit, because after all, it is your wall - but still, basic rules of consideration apply ( try to keep up good manners, no personal insults etc).

I agree with you Keyhole we have to be considerate , sometimes i've recieved "attack" comments, and i prefer not to start an argument with them, and just post a related article about the topic or take the conversation to another place with good manners and not imposing anything to anyone .

 

[Yupo]

There was a recent story (on Sott?) about China using a social code to ID good behaviors, giving people some sort of credit rating for citizenship value. I do have concerns for Facebook and similar site postings to be used against us one day.