Authenticity Killer and Facebook Commenting?

March 12, 2011 5:45 pmComments Off on Authenticity Killer and Facebook Commenting?Views: 1

facebook-commenting

Facebook has been accused of the many crimes in its short lifetime, as well as disrespecting privacy, decreasing our vanity and even turning kids into narcissists. currently blogger Steve Cheney is adding another charge to the indictment — authenticity killer.

In a thought-provoking post, Cheney argues that the new Facebook commenting, that broadcasts your comments on alternative sites in your Facebook stream, is a component of a drive towards forcing individuals to take care of only 1 identity on-line. No additional hiding below totally different user names (sorry, trolls) or separating your personal views (”tequila is tasty!”) from your skilled persona (”I’m a awfully serious adult you’ll trust with giant amounts of cash.”)

We have only 1 body, Cheney says, however we tend to aren’t meant to be one person. everybody wears {different|totally totally different|completely different} masks in numerous social things and among different teams of individuals. Things ought to be no totally different online:

    Last week a bunch of huge sites across the net, as well as TechCrunch, adopted Facebook commenting. the mixing of the formatting and fonts is therefore robust that when you’re reading comments you really feel such as you are on Facebook…. This latest push by Facebook to tie individuals to 1 identity across the interwebs is incredibly troublesome. the matter with tying internet-wide identity to a broadcast network like Facebook is that folks don’t wish one normalized identity, either in real life, or just about.

individuals yearn to be people. they require to be authentic. they need various totally different teams of real-life friends. They stylize conversations. they’re emotional and have an innate ought to connect on {different|totally totally different|completely different} levels with different individuals. this is often as a result of humans are born with an instinctual need to know the broader context of their surroundings and build rapport, a social awareness typically known as emotional intelligence…. forcing individuals to comment and additional broadly chatting with log-on with one identity puts a colossal stranglehold on our terribly nature.

    Face it, authenticity goes means down when individuals apprehend their 700 friends, grandma, and 5 ex-girlfriends are tuning in every time they post one thing on the net. Don’t believe me? visit TechCrunch and count the comments on last week’s posts. Better yet, go browse the comments. They suck. They’re sterile and neutered.

While i’m skeptical of the many criticisms of Facebook, Cheney’s issues build sense to me. As politicians prove frequently, the broader the audience you would like to please with an announcement, the blander it’s seemingly to be, and I, for one, will surely curtail my commenting if I knew all of my Facebook friends would see.

But one net identity isn’t simply seemingly to sap the life out of conversation on-line, it may even be an impediment to non-public growth. Not solely can users be locked in to 1 identity, they’ll be unable to vary that identity abundant over time, creating self-reinvention tough. Jaron Lanier, author of you’re Not a Gadget, once used a famous example to clarify this drawback at a lecture (as connected by Nicholas Carr):

    Imagine, Lanier said, a young Zimmerman making an attempt to show himself into [Bob] Dylan these days. Forget it. He would be trailing his on-line identity – his “one identity” – all the means from Hibbing to Manhattan. “There’s that goofy Zimmerman child from Minnesota,” would be the recurring word on the road in Greenwich Village. The caterpillar Zimmerman, locked into his early identity by myriad indelible photos, messages, profiles, friends, and “likes” plastered across the net, would stay the caterpillar Zimmerman. Forever.

Are you involved regarding being forced into adopting one identity on-line or does one suppose the troll-busting potential of the thought outweighs the downsides?

Related posts:

Tags:

Comments are closed