Screenshot of Facebook post from January 30, 2011.
Irritated, I sighed and glanced at my mother. I had shared my latest post on social media, Egypt, and (my) pseudo-activism on Facebook. And no one had commented.
I sifted through my Facebook feed. Ah, yes! Somebody just checked in at the dry cleaners. A handful of “likes” earned, naturally. And oh, look! Someone ate a ham sandwich that was really good. A thread, ten comments deep, was generated.
Oh, for fuck’s sake.
“Are my friends on Facebook as apathetic and uninspired as I think they are?” I asked my mother. I could tell she understood where this question was coming from, but she couldn’t formulate a response.
And that was fine. Because I couldn’t quite figure it out, either.
The Hunt for Stimulation
On Monday morning, I shared part one of this series on virtual life, The Evolution of Friendship, on Twitter. Ten minutes later, a few bloggers retweeted the link. Shortly after, as I was getting ready for work, more followers shared it. And on my drive to Oakland, even more joined in on the blog-post-sharing love.
Succès!
Screenshot of Facebook post on March 7, 2011.
Why was it well-received on Twitter? We’re talking about friendships in an online age: The topic is fascinating. It’s relevant. It’s sexy. It’s now. As I suspected, my “friends” on Twitter, many of whom I have never met in real life, think about it, get it, and embrace it.
I also shared the post on Facebook, a different network of people (and readership). Later that morning, I logged on to see what was said.
And . . . nothing. No red notifications and—not even!—any “likes.”
Disinterest, as usual. I was not surprised.
* * *
Screenshot on Twitter on January 31, 2011.
Are people not interested in engaging in intellectual, thoughtful conversations on Facebook? A day after I posted my Egypt piece, I expressed my discontent on Twitter because I sensed these folks would understand my frustration.
And they did.
So, what’s going on?
The Compartmentalization of Friendship
First, here’s how Facebook and Twitter have evolved for me: 93 percent of my connections on Facebook (216 people out of 232) are people I know and have met in the flesh: friends, family members, graduate school buddies, co-workers, and childhood classmates. Three (the Compression DJ crew, the Junglist Militia, and the City of San Mateo) are entities. Sixteen are individuals I’ve never met but who share an interest in travel (freelancers). Based on my connections, Facebook is a relatively accurate reflection of my social and personal life in the real world.
Here’s the breakdown of people on Twitter whom I’ve met in the flesh, given the 78 handles I follow:
- “Traditional” friends: 6
- MFA classmates: 3
- Trazzler team: 3
- Travel bloggers: 8
Compartmentalization in the virtual world: Twitter lists!
The remaining 58? No intersections in real life. Yet. As for my 600+ followers, the percentage I regularly engage with is small. Still, the thoughtful interactions I have on Twitter, driven by ideas and mutual passions, are noticeably more frequent than on Facebook.
So, back to the question: are people on Facebook—the friends of my real world—an uninspired lot? Certainly not. Yet the type of interaction I have on Facebook is alarmingly shallow and intellectually dull. My mother and I pondered why, and maybe the lack of engagement has more to do with Facebook itself rather than those who populate it. Perhaps it’s the portal of mundanity: a space to gossip, to complain, to find others who agree with your complaints, to waste time, and to compare the fetuses of your pregnant friends—isn’t that why people post sonogram photos?—rather than to disseminate and be stimulated by ideas (and subsequently stir the pot).
Facebook is the sofa in my family room, right in front of the TV.
* * *
At present, these two mini-universes—Facebook and Twitter—continue to divide my life in a way I cannot control. As time passes, I grow distant from the population on Facebook. I crave something on a daily basis—worldly inspiration?—that I’m unable to find there. And because Facebook is, by default, the outlet connecting me to my “real” friends, the disconnect I’m experiencing is dangerous. While I can count the friends I physically see on a regular basis on one hand, what does that mean for the other connections I have—the insipid ones that float in a virtual black hole because, well, we added each other and haven’t talked to each other since?
I feel alienated from friends on Facebook as a whole because we simply co-exist, without interaction, in the same online space; the more I engage with and share ideas and creative work with “friends” on Twitter, the more my “real” but idle friendships on Facebook disintegrate.
It comes down to compartmentalization. I find myself filing my friendships and relationships, online and off, into tidy drawers—did you not see my bulleted list above?! Yet as I do this, gingerly and methodically, “friendship” becomes more elusive as “real” and “virtual” continues to collide.
This is my experience. Is yours different?
Other Parts in this Virtual Life Series:
- Notes on Virtual Life, Part I: The Evolution of Friendship
- Notes on Virtual Life, Part III: Nomadic Relationships
- Notes on Virtual Life, Part IV: On Unplugging & Merging Virtual and Real
- Notes on Virtual Life, Part V: Proximity & Physical Space
- Notes on Virtual Life, Part VI: Facebook Status Updates (And What I Could Have Said)
omg! its like you heard my heart crying…i’ve been whining about the same case -no likes/comments on Facebook. your post and some of the follow up comments made me smile thinking that I’m not the only one in this world undergoing this dilemma, and honestly speaking some times i get so annoyed that I feel like de activating my account on FB but then that is my only mode to connect with some long distant friends.
any way thanks for the awesome post!
Glad you enjoyed it and that you related to the thoughts in the comments, too!
I’m not on Twitter, but my experience on Facebook is quite different than what you’re describing. I often have thought-provoking, intellectually-stimulating conversations on Facebook. However, I only ever have them with a certain type of Facebook friend: college friends with whom I have had the same sorts of conversation with in real life. However, even when we have controversial conversations, they are all very self-consciously theoretical and about testing out ideas, not about expressing hard-held beliefs or attacking other positions. I wonder if part of the reason some people on Facebook might be reticent to engage in controversial conversation is because they don’t know who exactly will be able to see their comments on someone else’s wall post and they aren’t willing to expose themselves to possible misinterpretation by people who they may end up having to make awkward conversation with near a punchbowl or cheese tray at some point in the future. After all, it’s so difficult to tell how people will receive what you write, and the margin for misinterpretation is so high (especially since it seems that once you write something, the opinion seems concrete and fully-realized unless you constantly reference its still-forming state). Those concerns may be mediated by something like Twitter, where people are slightly more anonymous.
The margin for misinterpretation is so high. Totally. (On Twitter, too, and perhaps even more so since you’ve only got so many characters to get your point across — or explain yourself if misinterpreted.)
I hear you on having more substantial or thought-provoking conversations with certain types/groups of friends — I feel the same. Which is why the Circles feature in Google+ is interesting — choosing a setting so only certain groups can see a particular post — and there’s this kind of labeling/compartmentalization on Facebook, too (the “Close Friends” and other lists, for instance) but for some reason I’m not sure it works the way I’d like it to…
I started reading from fourth or fifth post of the series and now reading my way back. I first stumbled on this website at least six months ago and revisited every now and then because of your writing on travel, which is what brought me here in the first place.
I agreed with you that real life friends are due to proximity. Because our personalities clicked so we became friends. I once talked to a friend about how our circle of high school friends never share anything deeper than a few laughs and games. We both kind of pity on the waste of the possibility of a bigger bond and closer knit group. Sometimes I thought if I should abandon this group and find people who I can connect to in real life.
Twitter gives the better choice for a deeper connection because it’s based on passion/interests. I love the openness of Twitter and how proactive one is to seek out those who share same interests and have your own little community on the WWW
Could it be that the reason we have the offline friends is because our minds cannot maintain the level of intellectual stimulation on a daily basis? As many experts noted that we all need “play” in our lives in order to nurture our creative minds. So short bursts of stimulation is enough for a block of time. Therefore the friends that you look forward to engage in a conversation with is not yet ready to engage it’s not yet relevant to them? As they say there’s a time and place for everything.
These are my questions while I’m writing this. Maybe I’m making excuses.
“Could it be that the reason we have the offline friends is because our minds cannot maintain the level of intellectual stimulation on a daily basis?”
Really intriguing question. I have different sets/levels of friends, and the conversation topics often depend on who I’m with…
Thanks so much for the thoughtful comments here, and thanks for revisiting!
Spot. On. And beautifully written. I’ve already kind of commented on FB vs twitter on your last post.
To grossly generalise, I think people tend to use the two media for different things. Facebook is a time wasting device (the sofa in front of the TV – LOVE it) whereas (with the exception of ham sandwich tweeters) people use twitter to connect and to access information. I suspect these things are largely a function of the interface. twitter doesn’t lend itself to anything but, well, 140 character grapeshot. Facebook has Farmville. (Incidentally, I don’t spend much time on Facebook, but often use hootsuite to send tweets to my FB page too, in order to “connect” with people who aren’t (active) on twitter. I think it pisses a lot of my “friends” off.)
I wish I could say my experience is different. Unfortunately, it’s exactly the same. And I too, don’t know how to really change it or if I really want to. I was just telling someone this morning in a skype meeting (the way I met this person I was skyping with, who I am now doing business with) is that twitter represents the people I choose to get to know and that have similar interests as me. Or their interests are complimentary or thought provoking, etc. Whereas Facebook, is the people I’ve just always known and never had a huge choice in knowing. They’re high school, college and former work friends from the days I had a corporate job in a cubicle.
Kirsten!
Thanks for the note (and just saw your tweet with a link to this series of posts — thanks!).
Whereas Facebook, is the people I’ve just always known and never had a huge choice in knowing. Totally. It’s sorta what my friend Chris listed above (his #3 comment) — Twitter very much is representative of our current (and perhaps future) ideas and passions, while Facebook is simply a mashup of our past, whether or not we’d like to remember it or not.
Cheri, that is HYSTERICAL!! I totally get what you’re talking about! It’s like you put up an intelligent post and it goes into a big, black hole. But post a picture of your baby or pet doing something inane and people actually read it!! Crazy!
P.S. I sent you a friend request
Hey Sarah–
I’m flattered you used the word “hysterical” — I don’t want people to think I’m being too serious, bitchy, or ranty. It’s all quite silly, isn’t it? And yes, it often feels like meaningful comments made on Facebook get lost. Not all the time, but much of the time. Thanks for visiting!
I read (and loved) this last week, and it’s part of the reason I’ve had FB bouncing round my noggin for the last few days, and partly why I finally bit the bullet and Facebooked my blog last night.
Without wanting to be too sniffy (and hypocritical, considering my new Page), I’ve always regarded Facebook as the place everyone went when MySpace turned into a total dive.
But, just as Twitter has worlds within worlds, like Copernican celestial spheres, or….or, an onion [Warning: internal stack error Metaphor-FAIL], Facebook has its depths and its meaningful communities. My sniffiness took a hammering when I started following @legalnomads’s FB page, which is just as thoughtful as its Twitter counterpart.
One thing strikes me, though. On Twitter, it’s so much more acceptable to unFollow, to not have to listen to someone’s wibblings. On FB, unFollowing someone is social Defcon 1. It’s a major judgement – “you suck so much I don’t even want to follow you on *Facebook*”. On Twitter? Not such a biggie. I have friends who have unFollowed me on Twitter because they tired of my more flippant rants. It happens. But Facebook? Pistols-at-dawn material, that.
So because there’s less pressure to conform and to Follow on Twitter, I reckon tongues are freer. People are more willing to say what they think, and deal with fallout. So it’s edgier and snarkier and…well, *better*.
Also? A lot of people have their mums and dads and siblings, and informants serving all of the above, on Facebook. That’s a major constraint on the creative adult brain. Cripplingly so.
Interesting how there’s an unspoken follow/add etiquette that’s distinct for both worlds.
Yup, I hear you on the mums, dads, siblings, informants on Facebook. And co-workers for me as well.
“But, just as Twitter has worlds within worlds . . . Facebook has its depths and its meaningful communities.” << I see how this possible, especially with your reference of Jodi's FB page. But I personally have yet to feel this. Hope to be proven wrong in time!
Seems I have had the same conversation with my daughter that you did with your Mom and we had the same lack of defintion that you encountered. But I do think this: the compartmentalized life you describe is largely held by all of us. Our Facebook family is as our “real family” (and some are) and as many families do, they take us for granted. You know: “I’ll see her at dinner on Sunday and tell her then”…it never happens.
For me, insipid postings of what you had forlunch, and at which store you are currently shopping make me wonder at the comments of just how instrumental Facebook really was in the current revolution in Egypt.
Of course, it could just be my “family” that is that is obsessed by lunch.
I very much enjoyed your first post on this subject (found via twitter through another of your followers who RT’d it) and now I find myself nodding in agreement to this one.
I am constantly frustrated by the lack of response by my friends on FB. I came to Facebook late, as I’d already been using Twitter for a year first. But I could not convince my real-life friends to use Twitter, so I begrudgingly joined FB. I thought that “this” would finally ensure that my friends saw (and presumably would read) my blog posts. Not so much. If they do read them, they almost never comment, either on FB or or on my blogs.
My FB friends are people I know in real life (about 90% of them anyway) and my Twitter friends are people I’ve NEVER met (about 99% of them), yet my Twitter “friends” are the ones who give me the most consistent feedback, both there and in comments on both my blogs.
I think I have higher expectations of my real life friends and family which is why the disappointment is so much greater.
I guess the bigger question for me is “why does it matter?” Do we only blog for vaildation from others? I hope the answer is no, and I strive for that, but still, it’s nice to be recognized for the hard work.
Hey Kristina–
Sounds like your Twitter/FB “makeup” (percentage of those you know in real life vs. not) is similar to mine. I share your frustrations; sometimes I feel like I’m being overly critical and thinking too much about it (re, your question: Why does it matter?), but from the collective silence on Facebook (even with this recent post), it feels like the majority don’t want (or have the time?) to ask this question. Perhaps I’ve become the annoying blogger-friend who writes fluff about gallivanting around the globe and silly social media. (I’m exaggerating — well, a bit — but you know what I mean).
Interesting that you have “higher expectations” of your real life friends and family; I feel this way, too!
Ahhh, the much anticipated part 2. Love this Cheri and you bring up more points of things I’ve been thinking about. Just had a conversation yesterday with one of my editors and we were talking about why/how some things provoke so much interest, while others that would seem to provoke 100 times the interest, in actuality, provokes little to no interest. I’ve become increasingly disinterested in Facebook. It’s become more of one of those flashing marquees like you see on the Vegas strip. “All you can eat buffet”, “It’s date night”, “Macaroni and Cheese inside a Grilled Cheese is the Shit”, and so on.
It’s interesting to me that it takes much less work to like something on Facebook, yet most of the things I publish on there rarely get comments or likes, unless it is something very controversial. However, I can post the same thing that gets nothing on Facebook, post it on Twitter with less characters and it gets 5 retweets and 5 replies. Thus, I end up liking Twitter more. It’s become more personal to me. You don’t ever hear of “Facebookups”. But Tweetups are regular, daily language on Twitter.
Ha, Facebookups — nice. You’re right, you don’t hear of these! As I’d said in my DM to you, this post didn’t generate much discussion either, which I expected (with the exception of my brother’s thoughts, and thanks to him!). You use a fitting word — provoke — and I think now I’m just purposely (and maybe irritatingly?) stirring the pot. Read Eugene’s comment as well — he says he simply keeps the worlds separate. Maybe I’m just going to let it be and not force it.
Oh, and are you posting things on Facebook as you, on a personal profile, or on a Traveling Philosopher page? I feel silly creating a Writing Through the Fog page because a) I don’t have a solid enough readership and b) I’m not quite interested in promoting my blog like that. But I wonder if creating that distinction would make a difference in generating the discussion I seek on Facebook.
As far as your question, I do some of both. I didn’t do a FB page until recently. I said that if I got up to about 100 subscribers on my blog that I would do that. I just have an automatic thing that publishes to my page, which surprisingly gets more likes/comments, than if I post something from my blog on my personal page. It’s not that much more, very small, but still, it seems that people have been more likely to comment on my page, than my profile, even though my page has less followers.
Again, the things that have gotten the most comments have been something very small, where you wouldn’t logically expect people to comment and such, or something very controversial. The 2 most popular things on FB was: 1) A blog post from Robert Reid about “blind retweeting”, which got 19 comments 2) A comment in which I said: “For every time I say Ben Affleck is good in a movie, he’s bad in 10 others,” which also got 19 comments.
I’ve been watching you to come to this conclusion (via Twitter) at the same pace that I have. I think it is actually you who I often quote in saying that if you don’t “get” Twitter you won’t ever get it.
At any rate, I’ll summarize my reasons since I am in total agreement with you:
1.) Twitter is far more aspirational in that you engage with people based on interests and ideas rather than proximity.
2.) It’s a public record of how you think and thus subject to more scrutiny from outsiders. For such an ephemeral medium I’d say you’re forced to make it count.
3.) It’s actually less random than Facebook in that it’s representative of your vision for the PRESENT rather than a haphazard mash up of the past two decades of acquaintances.
Really enjoying the posts!
Ah! Number 3. Yes — excellent way of putting it.
On the surface, Twitter seems random and superficial and stupid, especially to those who don’t use it. But I know you get it — and I really wish there was more of this “crossover” of friends on both sites.
It’s kinda like I expect my closest friends to automatically follow me into all the different online worlds there are (Twitter, Flickr, Tumblr, whatever) — but they don’t. And then I realize the online world is made up of sub-worlds and levels where people must willingly choose to enter.
It’s very weird. But, as you hinted at, there’s a quality to all this that is very immediate — very in-the-PRESENT. Comments like yours make me feel comfortable continuing to experiment with Twitter (socially and intellectually) and forging new friendships.
Thanks for leaving a note!
I, too, like #3 of Chris’s list.
I share your sentiment regarding how Twitter and Facebook differ — for stimulating, interesting links and conversations, I turn to Twitter. For things like daily events, mindless updates, Facebook is where I go to.
The two worlds are so different for me, that I purposely keep them apart. How? I don’t advertise my Twitter handle anywhere in my FB profile, and I never talk about my personal FB profile on Twitter.
The people who follow me on Twitter have done so organically — not from any of my blog posts, not from Facebook, but from seeing my tweets in others’s timelines (RTs, replies, etc). I think that’s the way I’d like it to be.
###
P.S. Ever had the awkward conversation when one of your FB friends finds out you’re on Twitter and then asks you to follow them on Twitter? Except that… all they tweet about is the same stuff they post on FB (mindless chatter). Yet another reason why I keep FB and Twitter completely separate!
Eugene–
Yay — nice to see a note from you. Huh, that’s interesting — you purposely keep these worlds separate. Aside from your personal profile, do you have a page(s) for your reading and/or photography blogs? As I wrote to Spencer, I wonder if creating a Writing Through the Fog page would make a difference and create a place for the discussions I crave on Facebook. Even so, that wouldn’t directly address what we’re discussing here; I shared this post on my Facebook wall yesterday and, as suspected, it didn’t generate much discussion either. Maybe I’ll stop trying to provoke responses.
But your comment about intentionally keeping these worlds separate is intriguing, and as I’d hinted to Chris, I continue to feel my way through the distinct sub-worlds within our virtual world. It’s not just a vast, borderless online universe anymore, is it? There are levels, each with their own settings, rules, vibes.
Oh, and to answer your P.S. — I know what you mean about the tweets being an extension of the “mindless” chatter posted on Facebook. Which is why I get irked when people say, “Twitter is useless — it’s just like text messaging your friends in public, or just a bunch of Facebook status updates.”
Clearly, it doesn’t have to be if you use it with a sense of purpose or strategy.
Excellent points. I feel that people just don’t take the time to click on “newsy” or “intellectual” sounding links on FB. They’re all about the silly pictures and quick jokes, but don’t want to actually read something of importance. Or have the time….scan, scan, scan…”Oh, here’s a picture….more scan…more scan….”okay, bye for now” That kind of thing….Did that even make sense?
Or, if they do read it, maybe they just don’t understand or “get it” so they don’t want to leave a comment that might make them look dumb to the rest of the FB world. Just some of my random thoughts on the subject.
I’ve read some of your blog pieces and think they’re awesome.
“They don’t want to leave a comment that might make them look dumb.” << My mother actually said this when we chatted. To go a bit further: perhaps, with the mingling of bloggers/writers and non-bloggers/non-writers in my Facebook universe, there is a sense that if you're not in the blogging/traveling industry, you don’t have insights to add to the discussion? (Which is simply NOT true!) I don’t know. I want to mix the two worlds, but I can’t force something like that.
Yes, I sometimes wish non-writers would comment on things I post on FB….or even just let me know that they’ve read it. I agree that the two worlds should collide. Why can’t they?!! But, yeah, it’s hard.
I also encountered something similar with you. This makes me feel like leaving a comment here, though I understand that you might feel strange for such a stranger’s comment.
I’m from Hong Kong. Probably quite similar to what happened in your place of living, nearly every citizen here has a Facebook account. Twitter isn’t that popular here, but “miniblog”, a Chinese version of Twitter, is. So, what you’ve told in this post do resemble some stories here.
Put it in this way, people treat Twitter/Miniblog as a school, a forum, a marketplace, where we share thoughts, get attached with what we feel interested, while keep away from the others. In other words, those following you are someone already interested in your words.
Facebook, then, probably is….a family. A big family. It’s not that selective. We make a new friend, add each others as “friend” though we are not likely having any common interest, just to keep a contact. Well, for those who don’t have common interests with you, the only thing that could expect a “like” is probably some shallow, daily life things. Facebook is probably designed to facilitate this kind of interaction, too.
Last night I wrote a long passage on FB about some social issues. Thank God there’re 2 likes and 3 comments for it, still far less than those checked in at a famous restaurant or it’s toilet. Sometimes I would think about keeping away from FB too, as if it is really pointless to share something that no one feel interested, or I don’t feel interested. Well, now, I treat it as a more publicized blog, telling myself not to expect any responses, while also post something in between the spectrum of “shallowness” and “thought-provoking”, and respond more to the others’ posts. After all, there are really some friendships I wish to keep tighter through FB…
P.S. I have read the blog post you mentioned at the beginning of this post. Well, agreed and disagreed. What I really want to say is, it’s so fascinating to read your blog posts.
Hi Frederick–
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment. Amazing, isn’t it, how we can interact here on my blog, a virtual space, with you in Hong Kong and me in San Francisco, and share our thoughts on a social media network, Facebook, that has changed the way we view our relationships and friendships.
“Well, for those who don’t have common interests with you, the only thing that could expect a “like” is probably some shallow, daily life things. Facebook is probably designed to facilitate this kind of interaction, too.” << Really like this. I totally agree.
I also liked your comment that on Facebook we're not that "selective" and we are simply keeping/collecting contacts. Like a virtual Rolodex.
And you made me laugh with the checking-in to the toilet comment!
Cheers,
Cheri
Thanks for your replies too. Glad that Mark Zuckerberg haven’t conquered the world yet and we still got somewhere on blogs and twitter that won’t put our thoughts into black hole. Nice to read your words!