From Pine View Farm

Facebook Frolics, De Agony of Defriend 1

At Psychology Today, Susan Krauss Whitbourne considers the unfriended:

Psychology is beginning to discover the uses of Facebook for research on relationships as in studies of friendship networks. However, Facebook’s unique properties as a platform for relationships make it a phenomenon worth of study in its own right. In the case of unfriending, this is particularly true. Unfriending is perhaps the ultimate in passive-aggressive forms of rejection that doesn’t have a counterpart in the “real” world of relationships. On Facebook, no one tells you that you’re unfriended; they just uncheck you as a friend. They never have to tell you in person or even explain why, nor do they need your consent to do so.

It goes on (and on) with the comfortable assumption that Facebook somehow matters more than ice cream.

I can almost imagine things like this being written about MySpace seven years ago, as least about the teen set who were so enthralled by blinking lights and flashing icons.

I know persons whose world seems to be limited to Facebook; if you aren’t using Facebook, you barely exist for them. Trying to get their attention outside of the Facebook bubble is–er–quite an effort.

I suggest that, rather than investigating the horrible trauma of the unfriended, the writer research the irony of the Facebook bubble–how a server farm so big can create individual worlds so small.

Lord, please give me more important things to worry about than being “unfriended” by a Facebook “friend.”

Share

1 comment

  1. George

    June 20, 2012 at 11:24 am

    I agree. Try to get some people you carelessly ‘friended’ on Facebook to even acknowledge you on Facebook, it’s just as useless. So I dumped 80 percent of my list. My experience told me the majority of the Facebook users I came in ‘contact’ there were just trying to use their ‘friends’ as an audience for whatever stuff they were stealing elsewhere. Plus, the higher the  number of ‘friends,’ being the metric by which one signals the alleged size of the virtual johnson. Twitter’s not a lot different.
    I saw the title of a story yesterday at some snob place, the New Yorker, musing “Could Social Media Have Stopped Jerry Sandusky?” Mark Zuckerberg, attributed as the savior of everything, now he can eliminate pedophilia and child abuse. Three weeks ago it was organ donor shortage. Perhaps two weeks from now someone will proclaim Facebook has found out how to eliminate malaria as well as halitosis. 
    People who are trying to make careers and burnish their resumes write absurd crap about social media because they are often angling to be seen as experts on something that’s always on everyone’s lips. Therefore they are forced to lie a lot because no one rewards those who point out Mark Zuckerberg is more like Bernie Madoff than Bill Gates.