I gather that the Quaker Facebook group is going through one of its regular debates about identity and tone and moderation. The problem is Facebook. It is the most direct competitor of Quaker-produced media. Its algorithms and moderator tools are not designed for the kind of considered, inclusive, Spirit-led, and non-reactive discourse that is Quaker style at its ideal (yes, we blow it ourselves constantly but hopefully keep striving).
I posted there tonight suggesting that Friends consider a media diet that includes more Quaker media — books and magazines and blogs and videos and in-real-life discussion opportunities. I worry that if Facebook groups become the most visible style of Quaker dialogue, then we will have lost something truly precious.
This message isn’t new to longtime readers of QuakerRanter. I extolled blogging as a hedge against Facebookjust yesterday and in August I wrote about some of the dialogue problems inherent in the Facebook model.
I’ve been figuring out Facebook strategies for Quaker media since it opened up to non-students circa 2006. I appreciate much of the attention it’s provided over the years. Social media like YouTube has also been a useful platform for things like the Quakerspeak projectdespite owner Google’s spotty track record. But it’s becoming hard to deny that social media has reshaped the style of civil discourse and trollish hackery, mostly for the worse. I think it’s really essential that we become more conscious of the sources of our daily media diet.