Faceless Communication - the Facebook Phenemenon
I’m no luddite but it’d be fair to say that I’m not an ‘early adopter’ either [luddite = opponent of new technology]. I still have to give one of the young lads at church a call to get the DVD Recorder to work [Bruce if you’re reading this I need another tutorial – tried to record the cricket and got 45 minutes of ‘snow’]. The latest phenomenon that I’ve been slow to endorse is Facebook. I’ve only ever seen it once and when I visited the site I found a picture of me with the additional appendage of a redneck beard. The boys at Quirky Motion were clearly having a quiet week!
Facebook is the social networking tool that’s replaced MySpace as the ‘de rigeur’ site for virtual interaction and communication. It’s nothing less than a phenomenon. There are apparently 30 million registered users. Most of them are young adults. I’m no longer a young adult and so it’s not come into my purview until recently. But Facebook has now reached the tipping point. It’s gone from being ‘niche’ to becoming ‘mainstream’. People’s Dads are now registering! That’s why it’s come onto my radar.
Actually, it’s been buzzing around in the background of church life for a few months now. At first it seemed a brilliant way to facilitate what’s been described as ‘social networking’. And undoubtedly there are many positive things to be said about it. Andrew Lim, a fellow touch rugby player from my time at Moore Theological College Sydney, has listed the positives here and here. I’m inclined to agree with him. Like any relationship forming tool this has great potential for the gospel but I’m also aware that we’re in danger of uncritically accepting something of which we ought to be a little more cautious. There’s a need perhaps for discretion and discernment in our use of this tool.
None of my worries are determinative but let me express my reservations.
1. Facebook may be another distracting influence
On average people spend 19 minutes a day on Facebook. That’s not awful. But many Christians fail to find the time to open their Bibles and pray. I know that we’re not justified by the ‘quiet time’ but that can’t be right can it? Daisy Goodwin, writing in the Times, said ‘my habit is under control, but only just’. And that’s the point. It’s another tempting distraction that can quickly become addictive. If someone is poking us, leaving messages on the board, asking us to be our friend and so on it’s very easy to be checking our profile more often that our employers might like and more often that might be considered healthy!
2. Facebook encourages loveless interaction
Despite its name, its essentially faceless communication. That carries great dangers. Here are a few of the more obvious risks.
-
Social convention means that if we’re in a group of people and one or more are being left out of the conversation we make every effort to include them. Online we don’t feel the same obligation to help those who are a little on the periphery.
-
Whilst we’d never deliberately blank someone in real life, there’s no real issue in the virtual world. We just leave their advances unaddressed or we never even bother to include them.
-
We can be misunderstood because human communication involves more than words. I remember being told that a ‘senior saint’ had tried to discourage a young church leader from his habit of writing strongly worded letters. His reason was, ‘letters can’t smile’. His point was simply that much of our communication is non verbal and we can soften what’s said or strengthen what’s said through the intonation of our voice, our mannerisms, the eyes and perhaps all manner of things that might be termed ‘body language’. We can’t do virtual body language. Not even those small yellow characters [emotions?] that smile and wink and so on can complement our communication to the degree that a raised eyebrow or a shrug of the shoulders can manage.
We need to be aware that, perhaps inadvertently, we can be neglectful of what might be described as ’social graces’. In all our social interaction we must love one another. I know that we know that, I just think it’s harder to do online.
3. Facebook can help us create a virtual Amish community
We mustn’t be naïve about the tendency amongst some evangelicals to want to retreat from the world into the safety of the Christian ghetto. It’s such a safe place to be. And let’s be honest, contrary to the world’s perception of church, it’s terrific. After all, it’s what the new creation will be like, except without the sin. Rather than interacting with the unbelieving and occasionally antagonistic world we can run for cover and seek refuge amongst those who already agree with us on most things. But Jesus wants his church to be outward orientated and I fear that social networking sites simply play to our inclination to want to mix with people like us. So if we’re using Facebook in an exclusive and introverted way then I’ve got issues. That’s especially the case when it’s used for church groups. Just as we should at church, so we have to make every effort online to invite and include absolutely everyone. Not everyone will want to sign up to Facebook. Perhaps they know that they’ll be tempted to waste time and so they’ll want to keep it arms’ length. I guess I fall into that category. If the alternative to working hard at the Greek text for a Sunday sermon is some playful banter via the internet it doesn’t take a professional psychologist to work out which one panders to my sinful nature! Therefore our invitations to parties, social gatherings and so on must not only be given via Facebook. Sure we can use e-mail and text but how about phoning people up and talking - just like the good old days!
I may be over reacting. This may be an unjustified rant. But I think I’ve got a point. Some may disagree. I just hope that someone tells me to my face!
I’ve been waiting for this one.
You are right about the addictive nature of facebook although I think the initial buzz dies down after a few weeks and it sinks in to the background!
I would say it’s been designed to encourage real life face to face communication. Most people are now used to communicating though the web and know it’s limitations. The danger is that people not on facebook may miss out on the real face to face interaction organised through facebook.
I’m probably the chief hater of Christian ghettoizing (hence my skepticism about Christian schools, the Christian music industry, Christian Radio) but facebook does not encourage this, (it makes it impossible). What happens in practice, is it breaks down compartments in our lives it’s more like putting everyone you know in one room which is surly positive as it makes us accountable and transparent.
I can tell this to you face if you like but I can’t do that late on a tuesday night!
Comment by John Lumgair — August 1, 2007 @ 12:05 am
John
Thanks for your comments. I suspect that the subject of how a distinctive Christian worldview interacts with schooling and the media may need to wait for another post.
Facebook may put us all in one room but what concerns me is how we behave once we’re in that virtual space together. Because we can’t see one another we can’t pick up on who is being excluded, who is finding the conversation unhelpful, dull, childish and so on. In a ‘normal’ social scenario we can spot the yawn, the eyes glazing over, the person who’s not being included and the expressions of discomfort. I just think that’s hard to do online.
It ought not to be the case that people miss out on social interaction because they’ve not signed up to the latest fad. That’s exclusive and profoundly selfish. We should make every effort to include all people wherever possible not justify our exclusivity by bemoaning the fact that others aren’t in our online ‘community’.
Comment by Richard Perkins — August 1, 2007 @ 8:46 am
Perks,
Your comments are helpful because they further convince me of the human propensity for sin. It doesn’t matter where you put us!
Facebook is simply another way of interacting socially. I agree it would be weird if because of facebook people were meeting up less but the reality people are meeting up more at CCB and sharing their lives more.
The way humans interact, organise/structure/run their lives changes and looks like it always will. But your air of caution helps because as a christian church we need to be careful we don’t operate like any other social club.
But lets not miss out on the benefits.
The Amish Ghetto thing is a misunderstanding, if anything it is the opposite and more open. But just like in life you can choose to reveal your allegiance to Christ as little or as much as you like.
And I think you will find with CCB members it is clear they follow Christ and if anything more of their friends/colleagues know than before they signed up with facebook.
Tom
Comment by Tom Stanbury — August 1, 2007 @ 5:06 pm
Tom
Helpful stuff, thanks. Notwithstanding your positive comments, with which I wholeheartedly agree, let me ask you [and others] some questions. I can’t answer them, but perhaps you can give me assurances.
1. Are people meeting up more regularly because of Facebook or are only some people meeting up more regularly?
2. It’s one thing to nail your colours to the mast in the virtual world but it’s another thing to interact with the real world - are we more mission minded as a result of Facebook or are more focussed on ourselves?
perks
Comment by Richard Perkins — August 1, 2007 @ 5:19 pm
It was good seeing you in person today albeit briefly. These are my answers:
1) Facebook makes it much easier to arrange to meet up, as a result it leads to more face to face interaction. It also makes it easier to see people who otherwise might get forgotten.
2) Your separation between the “virtual world” and “real world” is a bit of a false dichotomy, there is one world.
I think Facebook is unlikely to influence how “mission mindeded” you are, you bring you attitudes it, It’s just a tool. Are we more mission minded as a result of the phone or are more focussed on ourselves?
Comment by John Lumgair — August 1, 2007 @ 9:31 pm
Good questions Tom. I personally think my circle of friends have benefited from having a source which the majority of people use to collate information from and for social gatherings. I understand the dangers of something like facebook, being potentially addictive and exclusive, but this can be said of many modern technologies, and also of going to the pub. Most of the time it is morally neutral.
I personally find it an encouragement that you can share public news through ‘walls’ or ‘notes’ and send private messages too. It is also a marvous place to display photos from social gatherings, and a great place to comment on them adding to the joy and memory they bring. It’s also brillient for allowing current friends to see a little of your past, and past friends to see how you have grown. Facebook is a nice unintrusive forum for new friends to get to know each other and become part of the your social circle. I particularly find this useful when I meet friends of friends in real life. Through knowing them on facebook, I’m more likely to know them faster in real life, which is always a good thing.
You can create groups on facebook. I think the International Cafe group has been a useful way for the student to feel part of the International Cafe when not there on Tuesdays. It has been slow progress getting the student on, but those who are there appreciate it. Also those who return to their home country can still use it to keep in touch with friends they made at the Cafe, and also they can be reminded of what is happening at the Cafe while they are away.
As of whether or not it is useful for the gospel, well this would depend on how it is used of course. I’ve already mentioned it is morally neutral by nature, but it has the potential to be used for good or gossip. I’ve found friends encourage me in the gospel and the rest of my walk as a Christian since facebook has been around. Yes, they could have emailed before, but facebook is a constant reminder of your circle of friends, prompting you to act upon that (for good or bad). You can also chose how much personal information you desire to be on your Profile page, and you can also delete unhelpful comments. I’m guessing stating ‘Christian’ as you religion on your Profile page should definatly engage conversation in the office with those who perhaps weren’t aware you are a Christian.
Facebook can be a big time-waster, but I think the hype died down a long time back, so most people use it infrequently during the day. It is certainly one of those things to be aware of in terms of distraction, but I see it generally as a positive thing. (I’m honestly not sponsored by facebook to say all this)
Comment by simeon — August 1, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Perks,
Your final question is one we should ask ourselves on a regular basis. And is actually a challenge to take on. How do we use facebook with a mission mindset?
But I have to disagree facebook is as real as the dialogue we are having now. And as real as the social I was invited to (via facebook) and went to on Tuesday night with people from St Andrews.
If we had a church building, we would have a church notice board (how old school is that) and then people would put things on that.
I wonder what happened with the introduction of the telephone was it not a proper invitation if you did not get it in the post in writing.
Tom
Comment by Tom Stanbury — August 2, 2007 @ 7:58 am
Gents, [why are the girls keeping their opinions to themselves?]
I trust that you appreciate that I’ve not been completely negative about Facebook. Andrew Lin’s article has made many of the points that you’ve subsequently raised. The purpose of the post was to argue that Facebook may have provided us with a technologically more effficient way to be ungodly in the way we react with newcomers, outsiders and people on the periphery of church life. I don’t use Facebook, as you know, and so I’ve raised questions which only you can answer. All I ask is that you do so honestly.
But, if I may, let me make a couple of additional points
1. John, I’m not sure you’re right to suggest that I’ve made a false dichotomy. I’ve simply distinguished two ‘modes’ of communication; on the one hand faceless communication through technological means that avoid direct speech and on the other hand face to face communication. I’m quite happy to accept that virtual communication is part of the one real world. But surely you accept that we can distinguish between which mode of communication we choose.
2. Sim, we don’t actually get anywhere by observing that the technological tool is morally neutral. Again, I’m happy to accept that. What I’m arguing is that this morally neutral tool in the hands of morally sinful human beings may actually encourage patterns of sinful behaviour. The reason I’ve argued that is precisely because we can’t see [in the true sense of that word] the other people online. Go back and read the post to appreciate the advantages of social convention in a group situation.
3. Tom, go on buy us a noticeboard!
perks
Comment by Richard Perkins — August 2, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
Quick comment- facebook can encourage us to be less sinful. If I went out on a saturday night and got trolleyed with my non-christian workmates (not that I would of course), I know that the next day, there’d be photos and comments for all the world to see. I’ve had non-christian friends asking for photos to be de-tagged and comments removed, incase certain people find out what they’ve been up to. My response? If you’re embarrassed by something you do- don’t do it!
Comment by Andie — August 3, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
We should all discuss this in the pub after church on Sunday face to face. If this was facebook we might have arranged this by now!
Comment by John Lumgair — August 3, 2007 @ 2:47 pm
Perks,
You will pleased to hear my brother brother thinks you have made some good points. But he did tell me via facebook.
Tom
Comment by Tom Stanbury — August 10, 2007 @ 8:02 am
Hi Perks - interesting and pretty valid - though perhaps me thinks he protests too much! Like all things, it can work for good or ill. I’ve met up with some old non-C school friends i’ve not seen for aeons directly as a result of Facebook. It all boils down to personal discipline like everything else. I’m sure that there were Christians reacting in the same sort of way (ie re virtual relationships etc etc) to the telephone when that first came in - or even the postal system… - just a medium - what it’s used for is what makes the difference
Comment by Mark Meynell — August 10, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
I think it’s worth saying that Perks is now a member of Facebook!
Comment by Phil Craig — August 31, 2007 @ 3:46 pm