Hive

Recently there was a significant and controversial news surrounding the Mormon church that made it’s rounds on Facebook. I took the opportunity to conduct a survey, an unofficial survey, my Facebook feed is biased as well as the ratio of friends to whom this news it impacted vs those who would never hear this news.  As the years have gone on I have come to conclude the following about social media:

• It creates community
• Within those communities a school of thought emerges
• This school of thought is regurgitated amongst the community
• There is a hive mentality on Facebook

Case Study:

In the most recent Facebook controversy, the Headline reads “Mormon church labels same-sex couples apostates” (CNN.) Or, “Mormons Sharpen Stand against Same-Sex Marriage” (NYT.) Depending on the community you prefer to subscribe to.

In a survey of Facebook posts:

• 70% were reposts accompanied with comment
• 20% were original thought (coincidentally this same 20% are outliers who consistently post original thought)
• 10% were reposts with no comment.  

Of these posts and comments, and here I include responses/replies, a whopping 80% used argumentum ad passiones. 

Wikipedia definition: Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones is a logical fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. [1] This kind of appeal to emotion is a type of red herring and encompasses several logical fallacies, including appeal to consequences, appeal to fear, appeal to flattery, appeal to pity, appeal to ridicule, appeal to spite, and wishful thinking. 

What I found interesting: 75% within the outlier ‘original thought posters’-- both for and against on either side of the controversy--  referenced established information. 10% did not post a controversial statement and took a humanist approach. The outliers remaining used emotion. 

To be clear, I am speaking of BOTH sides of the argument. Herein lies a paradox of social media. The factual evidence was a written policy taken from a handbook; interpreted to the needs of each community? I too rather frequently subscribe to this, to fit the needs of feeling validated.

Certainly there is much more to be said on this topic. The purpose of this post isn’t to discuss the policy, simply it’s mechanism as the mechanism is a prevalent, reoccurring theme in my social media usage. I used this informal case study to develop an understanding of the world around me, the reality which I understand and the reality which other’s understand. (I have found myself guilty of not having the imaginative abilities to understand the lives, perspectives or thought processes of others. I simply lack the ability to think as others do. It has lead to trouble when I have not considered the other possibilities, not from lack of trying, simply that I do not know what I do not know. I require communicative and expressive people or sources to help me.)  I have seen this community-of-thought-mechanism phenomenon occur repeatedly, with a similar breakdown of % as in the case study above, with other themes on social media such as:

• The role of relationships and their terms
• How to live life to its fullest
• Success is: material possessions vs experiences
• Religion: Role, function, and authenticity
• What is a meaningful life?
• Politics: Who deserves what and the rights attributed
• Look at my life! Isn’t it ___fill in the blank____?!!
• What to eat
• Fitness and fashion
• How to Human

These are pretty big topics we use our social media communities for to help us define our understanding. It seemingly gives a state-of-the-people as to what internet-able humanity focuses on in a globalized world (considering the bias of my fb feed.) I could argue social media isn't the appropriate platform for this transmission of identity or culture. That's the wistful part of me that believes in a world of explores like Darwin and Armstrong, writers like Toni Morrison and Jules Vern and J.R.R. Tolkein, and game-changers like Ghandi and Einstein; none of these perfect people.  Before social media was Media and school and the people in our community, towns, neighborhoods in which we lived and worked which molded our identities. The difference is social media has broadened the body of knowledge, schools of thought and brought the possibilities straight to our screens nearly instantaneously as news happens without requiring us to actually experience a thing before we are able to form an opinion of it, based on our exposure to the online communities we favor. Our informative interaction with reality, in this sense, is becoming less real and more digital. (For the record, Ted Talks and MOOCs, amongst others, are one of the best ideas of our time!)

I use Facebook, Pinterest and Instagram as my social media. Mainly to look at pictures, out of curiosity, to get ideas, or boredom. I post every once in a while but I am beginning to feel old, or less influenced by popular opinion. Or maybe it’s that I want to be one of those outliers who think and act for themselves. After all, the popular opinion these days is shun Hive Mentality. Facebook taught me that.

I got everything from someone. Nobody can be original.

~Philip Johnson