Friday, May 21, 2021

Facebook's prodding people into more conventional activism and away from just speech (and the criticisms I got recently)


Facebook plea

 Yesterday Facebook invited me to add a Covid19 Vaccine Frame to my profile picture.  I actually tried to do it and it didn’t work, and I admit that I could spend more time figuring it out.

Me at vaccine site March 18

First for my own facts:  I got the Pfizer vaccine shots on Feb 27 and March 18 (the second one two days early because of a website snafu)    I am following the “intellectual dark web” on this one and I believe that the vaccines are not 100% without long term future risk for younger adults but I do buy the CDC/WHO claim that the public health risk even for young people is greater from actually getting infected.  There is a bit of a moral quandary, though, on individual choice and common good. Public health is like that.

Also, when I got the second shot, I as filmed and actual shot was shown on WJLA7 (of me) that day.  But WJLA didn’t save the video, and my own video (taken by someone else) doesn’t show the shot going in.

Still, I have a problem with the idea that my own “social network of friends” will recruit people otherwise unconvinced to get vaccinated.  As a general principle, I generally do not allow other parties to use me to spread their message with my own supposed social status. 

The New Yok Times actually has a primer by Arnaud Gugneur and Karen Tamerius on how to talk to friends to get them to get over their hesitation on vaccination.  I actually “failed” that one because I generally give people facts as I know them, I don’t try to manipulate them first.  We’re getting into the whole Paul Rosenfels polarity thing.  I am not “masculine” enough (in his terminology) to want to manipulate people and act like a huckster.

Likewise, as I have indicated here before, I usually don’t run non-profits’ fundraisers on Facebook except under very specific circumstances for causes I have some specific connection to, never for “identarianism”.

I’m getting more flames or complaints from parties about my commenting on certain issues where I don’t have my own “skin in the game”, as you can see from the Books blog Monday May 17.  They feel that people who comment “gratuitously” on issues that don’t affect them as much as it affects others (whose sites don’t pay for themselves but who also don’t want to do conventional activism as parts of marginalized groups) are making it harder on marginalized communities by commenting “superficially” without getting more involved. This idea might also apply when people who belong neither to Judaism or Islam (or at least Palestinians) opine gratuitously on what has been going on in Israel recently.

This may comport with the whole situation that invited foreign interference starting in the 2016 election, when foreign interests were able to convince naïve Internet users to support extremist ideas (as with the Vice video above).

No comments: