Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

nber.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 527 posts

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#341

Post by eli_gottlieb »

svnt wrote: post #329
erkt wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>solved by eliminating the "feed" and instead displaying posts, updates, and pictures from friends, family, and those we know in real life. This is what Facebook was when we all signed up almost two decades ago. No one ever wanted a feed of people they didn't know. Free social media is inherently corrupt as they chase profits abusing the user base.

Maybe just phrasing but free social media isn’t the problem. VC-backed corporations masquerading as public services to gain user networks they can later monetize is the problem.

Well if we don't want them to monetize the user-network, someone would have to straight-up pay to use the sites.

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#342

Post by amitp »

8s2ngy wrote: post #41

I believe many of the problems in our current social media landscape could be solved by eliminating the "feed" and instead displaying posts, updates, and pictures from friends, family, and those we know in real life. This approach might conflict with the profit models of big tech social media and could go against what most people have become accustomed to. Personally, I would love a smaller social network where I can…

There's a version of Facebook that only shows things from your friends, and not "suggested" or "reels" etc.: https://www.facebook.com/?filter=all&sk=h_chr (it still shows ads but not the other random stuff)

And it doesn't scroll endlessly. It will display this at the bottom of the page:

> You're all caught up on Most Recent posts

> Check back later for more updates

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#343

Post by jjulius »

amitp wrote: post #342
8s2ngy wrote: post #41

I believe many of the problems in our current social media landscape could be solved by eliminating the "feed" and instead displaying posts, updates, and pictures from friends, family, and those we know in real life. This approach might conflict with the profit models of big tech social media and could go against what most people have become accustomed to. Personally, I would love a smaller social network where I can…

There's a version of Facebook that only shows things from your friends, and not "suggested" or "reels" etc.: https://www.facebook.com/?filter=all&sk=h_chr (it still shows ads but not the other random stuff) And it doesn't scroll endlessly. It will display this at the bottom of the page: > You're all caught up on Most Recent posts > Check back later for more updates

>... that only shows things from your friends...

And any page you follow, including anything that tries to convince you to click through to their website via clickbait, anxiety-inducing headlines, etc.. It also shows FB groups you're in, which are often full of their own unnecessary drama.

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#344

Post by rightbyte »

nomilk wrote: post #56

The surprise here is how little of an effect it has. Deactivating facebook makes you only 1/16th of one standard deviation happier. And instagram even less. And this was measured during elections, when the effect is likely to be greatest. Kinda crazy that the magnitude is so small! (my next [admittedly rather cynical] thought is "who funded this?")

Well the study was a couple of weeks, right? I guess it takes time to rebound.

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#345

Post by perching_aix »

aaronbaugher wrote: post #323
perching_aix wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the hivemind thing can be solved so long as people can see each others' comments. But then it's difficult to have a social media site without that.

The biggest problem on reddit is having both up- and down-votes. That allows the majority to effectively eliminate dissenting opinions on any topic it cares about by down-voting them to oblivion, and then pat itself on the back for the fact that everyone apparently agrees with it. Since it's possible to do that, some see it as an obligation and go at it with gusto, making it hard to have a conversation that strays ou…

HN also has both, but the score is only visible to the person who commented. I think it's an improvement in this regard, but then I rarely have hivemind issues. What do you think about this?

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#346

Post by jjulius »

zpeti wrote: post #326
erkt wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>solved by eliminating the "feed" and instead displaying posts, updates, and pictures from friends, family, and those we know in real life. This is what Facebook was when we all signed up almost two decades ago. No one ever wanted a feed of people they didn't know. Free social media is inherently corrupt as they chase profits abusing the user base.

I think this is what your conscious mind thinks but your actual desires don’t. Facebook was refocusing on friend and family content before TikTok came along. But they had to adjust to the TikTok trend otherwise they would have lost market share or potentially lost the entire market. You might think you want friend and family content, but actually you don’t. Not as much as you want engaging content.

This ignores nuance. There's "engaging content" (nods head) and "engaging content" (shakes head).

I want the former, not the latter. Social media is optimized for the latter.

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#347

Post by alabastervlog »

ljm wrote: post #299
johnisgood wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> actually hate me and talk shit about me whenever I'm not around. This happens virtually everywhere. It is extremely rampant. I have yet to find a place where there are humans and it does not happen, excl. friend circles.

Friend circles can be just as bad at excluding or ostracising others in the group for the pettiest of reasons. There’s always going to be a shot caller or instigator behind it and everyone else who is weak willed will get on board with it.

Had a long-time friend group explode last year over this. Years of behind-their-backs shit-stirring lies by a couple members of the group finally got figured out and called out, publicly, which lit the fuse. Exact same behavior that was called out was immediately employed to try to spin that and get these people's "enemies" pushed out of the group, which was the bomb going off. About half the group survived with some scarring, the rest just shattered.

Toxic people gonna toxic.

> There’s always going to be a shot caller or instigator behind it and everyone else who is weak willed will get on board with it.

Yeah, a major factor was lots of people putting up with some real bullshit for years to try to keep the peace. That, and the ones who did try to do something about it approached the problem-people one-on-one, which just led to them being lied to ("oh no, there's no problem between us") and then smeared even harder to others, and marginalized, having no idea why any of it was happening.

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#348

Post by FuriouslyAdrift »

zpeti wrote: post #326
erkt wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>solved by eliminating the "feed" and instead displaying posts, updates, and pictures from friends, family, and those we know in real life. This is what Facebook was when we all signed up almost two decades ago. No one ever wanted a feed of people they didn't know. Free social media is inherently corrupt as they chase profits abusing the user base.

I think this is what your conscious mind thinks but your actual desires don’t. Facebook was refocusing on friend and family content before TikTok came along. But they had to adjust to the TikTok trend otherwise they would have lost market share or potentially lost the entire market. You might think you want friend and family content, but actually you don’t. Not as much as you want engaging content.

My mind also wants lots of cocaine. That doesn't mean it should have it.

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#349

Post by alabastervlog »

blitzar wrote: post #159
raffraffraff wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wife went cold turkey on social media and then had to join Instagram and LinkedIn for her business. Now she's addicted to Instagram. No LinkedIn, not you, you boring Ted Talk humblebrag.

People love LinkedIn cringe on instagram and twitter - but on LinkedIn itself you have to confront the reality that these people, often colleagues / former colleagues etc. are being serious

> but on LinkedIn itself you have to confront the reality that these people, often colleagues / former colleagues etc. are being serious

I doubt many are being serious.

Business culture (at least in the US) is so steeped in lying and general fake-ness that in-group signaling as "real business person" involves public performances of bullshit.

It's what you're supposed to do in interviews: bullshit just the right way, to show you understand the game and are willing to debase yourself to play it. Otherwise you're "risky", either due to excessive commitment to ethical principles or to being too clueless or inept to play the game right. That's what's going on, on LinkedIn. "Humility" and "realness" even have to be faked just the right way.

It's incredibly gross.

Re: The effect of deactivating Facebook and Instagram on users' emotional state

#350

Post by throw99841216 »

noduerme wrote: post #289
thoroughburro wrote: post #279

They were provided with a quite plausible motivation. What is the plausible motivation in your scenario?

I appreciate what you're saying, but plausibility is a funny way to put it, since such a motivation would not have been plausible prior to Oct 7. Before that, I was a curious minority, and they liked to congratulate themsleves on welcoming minorities. Since no one had any problem with me before Oct 7th and then within days of seeing a lot of Jews killed, they apparently all got the bloodlust, I can only conclude that…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN