One Argument For Not Deleting Your Social Media Accounts

You’ve probably noticed this title knocking around at POS and in the clever section of all good bookshops. Enticingly mindful, chocolate box cover; Buzzfeedy, commute-friendly ‘Ten Arguments’. It’s an attractive concept.    

I guess it didn’t work on me, as I’m still here. Though Lanier seems to not see LinkedIn as ‘social media’ (when it manifestly is), while seeing WhatsApp - messaging in all but name - as social media. 

It’s all a bit shrill and strangely old fashioned. At heart, it hugely overstates the range and emotional power that social media actually has on people and exaggerates the true capacity any platforms have to change behaviour and to apply their apparent power craziness to our lives. It borders on moral panic, frankly. 

Take YouTube. YouTube is something I, for one, mostly use to watch archive footage of London, Myron Cohen stand-up routines and old episodes of the Muppets. The idea that YouTube is feeding me digital crack to keep me engaged - for addiction is the name of Lanier’s game - is frankly silly. 

WhatsApp? It's owned by Facebook, sure, but I haven't noticed it ruining my life or forcing me to vote Nazi since I started using it. Likewise Instagram, the pleasure of which is precisely down to the fact that it's almost entirely, benignly non-verbal and does nothing more demonically manipulative than show me occasional kitchen tiles, French novels I might want and the occasional drop at Uniqlo.

It’s old fashioned too - in the way that the very recent seems ancient in the digital world. It all reads like an angry late Boomer or early Gen Xer in the pub, bemoaning his daughter's phone addiction slash selfies slash chats in 2014 and seeing an age of darkness in all of it: all 'mind control', narcissism, addiction and corruption. Same Boomer spent three hours a night on the phone to his girlfriend and used to spend 45 minutes doing his hair at the age of 18. To be fair, Facebook circa 2014 was, at worst, pretty mean and anxious and might have even given us Trump and Brexit with the help of Vladimir Vladimirovich. But now? Isn't it just a place for bored retirees and car boot sales?

Then there’s the writer's 'B.U.M.M.E.R' acronym - the collective label describing their mission to extract income and change behaviour. Bad, bad idea, editor. However sensible the thinking behind it might have been (doubtful), pouring it into that supremely slacker coinage undermines the argument and makes him sound all too much like your uncle who calls Royal Mail 'Royal Snail' or calls the man who just ticketed him 'The Traffic Taliban'. The kind of person who in a previous era would have been frothing about fluoride in the water or passports with chips in them - and wants to talk UFOs and Teutonic Knights with you. The man in the pub who's deliberately still using a Nokia because Google want to steal his allotment. Him.

There are plenty of arguments for keeping a close eye on social media. Their handling of news and fake news; bullying, racism; scamming - and their borderline monopolistic advertising power. You don’t address it by talking about them like they’re puppet masters seeking to enslave us. It’s just paranoid and silly. Social media can have remarkable effects: I’ve met friends through it, uncovered local history through it and have had things I’ve drawn published because of it. When I’ve been ill in the past, it’s provided incredible company and encouragement. I even found this very book because of it. Let’s not go talking about it like Edwardians blaming the telephone for the breakdown of good society.             

Good title. Nicely potted. Surprisingly dotty and old fashioned in its execution. 'Reported and blocked' as we say on twitter.

#bookstagram #socialmedia #technology #marketing