Authentic connection platforms: the future of disintegrating social media

Authentic connection: A bonfire of the icons of major social media platforms—Facebook, X, TikTok, etc. In the clear blue sky above hover icons for the Fediverse and social media platforms Mobilizon, Mastodon, and Pixelfed.The social media platforms we once relied on for authentic connection are disintegrating. My ikigai—the reason I get up in the morning—is facilitating connection. But today’s major social media platforms—Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn, X, et al.—are all owned by billionaires and tech bros who impose their political leanings on their users and/or seek to make massive fortunes from revenue streams such as ads and selling user information.

These monolithic platforms increasingly control what can be posted via opaque and ever-changing algorithms, while reducing or eliminating moderation of trolls and spammers. Bots abound, pouring AI-generated slop into users’ feeds. Though X is the most prominent example, Facebook has abandoned its fact-checking program and drastically reduced the reach of posts to followers, and platforms like LinkedIn have tuned their algorithms to reduce the reach of posts that include off-site links.

The dumpster fire will continue

Major social media platforms are a dumpster fire, with no quick fix. Users remain on these platforms due to their network effect advantage; i.e., their value increases as more users join. For example, though I find Facebook’s ethical choices increasingly repulsive, I still use the platform sparingly because it is the only online service that some friends and family use, and a few of its local and professional groups have no significant online competition.

A corollary of the network effect is that as networks grow they become full of strangers, less coherent, and harder and more expensive to moderate effectively. Large platforms also become attractive places for those who need to feel important by having many followers and who concentrate on broadcast communication rather than two-way connection.

If you, like me, are interested in authentic connection with people in ways you determine, unfiltered by secret algorithms constantly tuned to maximize revenue or political ideologies, the future is bleak.

Except…

Read the rest of this entry »

Facilitating change: The power of sharing our experience

sharing our experience: illustration of two people, seated in chairs, facing each other

Sharing our experience of others directly with them can be incredibly powerful. Let me tell you a story…

Not long ago, I was working at a multi-day workshop with a 6-person group that included someone I’ll call D. D self-described themself as mentally ill, bipolar, and with psychological issues. They spoke slowly and described themself as not emotionally available, and often confused about what they said.

D also shared that they:

  • Felt isolated and wanted to get better at connecting with people;
  • Believed that other people couldn’t easily understand them and didn’t like them; and
  • Had a hard time deciding whether to attend the workshop.

D was clearly feeling fragile. Group work can be confrontational at times. So I privately hoped that the other group members would be supportive.

What happened?

It quickly became apparent that D was intelligent, perceptive, sensitive, thoughtful, and communicated clearly.

So from time to time during the group sessions, I’d tell D my experience of them. When appropriate, I’d say something like “By the way, you told us earlier that you think people find you hard to understand. I want you to know that I think you communicate really well, and I’ve had no problem understanding you.”

I didn’t have to worry about the rest of the group. They had a similar experience of D and regularly reinforced this and similar sentiments.

As the workshop continued, D visibly relaxed. We were impressed by how D had handled and was dealing with the many difficulties in their life. Our group liked D and told them so several times.

An unexpected conclusion

At the end of the workshop, participants had the opportunity to stand up in front of everyone (about 80 people) and share what they’d learned. Given what I knew of D, I didn’t expect them to contribute. So I was totally surprised when D got up and walked to the front of the room. Slowly, D said:

“I’m really nervous.

I learned that there are people in this world who like me, who understand me, and who I can have an emotionally intimate relationship with.”

D stopped and stood there, looking at us all.

I was weepy and the applause was loud and sustained.

Yes, sharing our experience of others directly with them can be incredibly powerful.

Do you have examples of the power of sharing your experience of others with them? Please tell us in the comments!

Being Present in the Age of the Mind Outside the Brain

being present: An image of looking up into the leafy branches of trees. Photo attribution: James Reis, from his exhibit Closer and Closer

Being present is tough! The other day, Celia and I were walking in Boston’s beautiful Arnold Arboretum when she asked me who’d responded to an email I’d sent. When I pulled out my phone to answer her question, she said she felt she was walking with a third person, a stranger.

Where are our minds?

Once, our minds were in our brains. Before tools, painting, language, and writing were invented, people had no way to represent knowledge outside their heads.
What if Celia had asked her question on a walk ten years ago? I would have either been able to remember the answer — or not.

Today, parts of our minds are outside our brains.
being present: An illustration in shades of blue of the silhouette of a person's head, with a melange of letters contained in a bubble behind them. Photo attribution: pixabay.comMore often or not, answers are available from devices in our pockets. Today we rely on machines for connection with information and others. Machines allow us to research what we want to know or explore.

We also have the routine ability to capture pertinent information in an appropriate secure store outside our brain — an in-basket, notepad, voice recorder, electronic device, etc. This frees us from the need to memorize data so we can work on other things. When we need information, we access it from the external data store, not our brain.

Ridding ourselves of the necessity for our brains to remember everything

Such access allows me to worry less about remembering information I may need. Like my upcoming appointments, background on a client before an initial call, or exploring places to visit on an upcoming trip. This is a core credo of David Allen’s Getting Things Done: “Your mind is for having ideas, not holding them.”

This freedom makes me more productive. It gives me a way to capture fleeting creative ideas that, in the past, I would have forgotten before they could be explored. I especially appreciate these technological benefits as I grow older and my memory is not what it once was.

The downside

Celia’s response, however, illustrates a downside to extending our minds beyond our brains. When we perform a move to secure storage or retrieval from it, the associated technology invariably intrudes into the relationship of being with other people present.

Celia says, “When I walk alone with you, I don’t want to feel I’m also with your 200 closest friends.”

I get it.

When I’m paying attention to my device, I am not present with her.

Some people seem OK with ignoring their partners or friends at the expense of their devices. I still marvel when I see a couple sitting together for dinner at a nice restaurant, both immersed in their phones for the whole meal. I wonder about their relationship, not that it’s ultimately any of my business.

Also, we don’t need machines to connect us when we’re alone. I recently returned from a five-day silent retreat in New Mexico where we did not interact with our fellow participants apart from the start and end and were miles away from cellular and Wi-Fi signals so our devices were off the grid. It was wonderful, and I learned a lot. [Here’s my post about a similar retreat held two years earlier.]

Luckily, compromise is possible between these two extremes while together with familiars: exclusion via total immersion in the digital world and shunning all machine connection while you’re with them.

A compromise

What I think works is explicit respectful negotiation when you want to move from direct presence to accessing devices. I could have said to Celia: “I don’t remember.” [Then I could pause to let her respond: she might have said, “Oh, don’t worry about it,” or “Can you look it up?”] … If she doesn’t respond I can ask: “Would you like me to look up the answer now, or can it wait?”

Sometimes I remember to negotiate to switch my presence in this way. It’s respectful and allows the other person(s) to choose what they want.

I know Celia appreciates it because it places our relationship first.

And that’s important to us.

Getting the best of both worlds

Being present with people you’re with is always important. Taking advantage of our modern abilities to expand our minds outside our brains can enrich our lives together. Negotiating the switch between these two forms of being allows us to get the best of both worlds.

Photo attribution: James Reis, from his exhibit Closer and Closer, and pixabay.com