After interactive intoxication, comes social media moderation

@wwaycorrigan

[For an audio/vlog version of this story, click here.]

Fellow imbibers, you know the feeling. The morning after the night before. 'OK, it was good fun but did I have to binge so much?'

When the hangover is particularly bad, the hair of the dog feels like the best, nay only cure. Or so we convince ourselves. And sometimes this does indeed do the trick, mentally at least. A few more doses of the poison that had done the initial damage, some rest and we're our regular selves again. Until the next time.

It's all a blur: Just like with alcohol, there really is no safe level of social media use.

Sobering thought

Anecdotally speaking — and from the odd personal experience (I'm usually good at not going over my limit these days) — hangovers tend to be worse the older one gets, from roughly mid-30s onwards. Equally worse is the beer blues, that uncomfortable feeling of self-reproach, when one has drunk to excess.

What often follows is a determination to go sober for a time. Some manage to do this for weeks or even months, especially if their last booze session ended badly. Others kick the habit completely.

I wouldn't mind going months without beer. My problem — or my excuse, if you will — is my unsettled lifestyle together with the country I'm in. Drinking out in standard tiendas in Colombia is one of the cheapest socialising pursuits on offer.

So come 6 or 7 o'clock of an evening the temptation for some tienda-beer time is strong. If only there were decent, more readily available zero-alcohol brews in such tiendas. Would I drink them, though? Is it the alcohol-fuelled sensation I'm after or merely the social setting?

'Early social media use was like downing Jägerbombs in the nightclub following an already heavy evening in the pub. It usually led to sloppy public displays of affection or ill-advised encounters of the brutish kind.'

Whatever the case, I've been more conscious of my Colombian beer consumption of late and have tried to cut back. (Again, I say Colombia because the last time I was back in Ireland I quite easily went weeks without any alcohol. Largely for the price reason already mentioned, I find it harder to not drink in these parts. Also, in Ireland I tend to have more non-beer-related activities with which to occupy my time.)

In fairness, I've always had a love-hate relationship with drinking, yet I feel I'm now more sincere, if not too successful, in my efforts to drink less. That I've just entered my 40s plays a part in this, no doubt. I may be becoming slightly more sensible. That's the hope.

Meta monsters

I get the same vibe shift — to use the phrase of the current zeitgeist — in not only my relationship with social media but also that of many other people. It's like there's a collective middle-aged-style questioning of our online behaviour, particularly with what I consider to be the more bathetic and vain platforms, Facebook and Instagram.

(Those Meta monsters are akin to cheesy daytime TV, dealing in lifestyle affairs, albeit Instagram does have a worrying mild-porn side to it. Elon Musk's X is of the late-night, heated-political-debate variety, swinging from the astute to the absurd. In case you're wondering, I'm not on TikTok and have no intentions of doing so. Ditto with Bluesky.)

In the early days of interactive intoxication, the average Facebook/Instagram user i.e. one whose content-sharing is not done with the aim of generating income either directly or indirectly, went on a post blitz. This appears to have waned of late. Many are now adopting a more considered approach.

In revelling terms, social media use fifteen or so years ago was like downing Jägerbombs in the nightclub following an already heavy evening in the pub. It usually led to sloppy public displays of affection or ill-advised encounters of the brutish kind. Or sometimes both. These days, it's more in the style of a quiet drink or two at the local. A reserved affair.

I can imagine those who follow me on Facebook or Instagram reviewing my recent activity and thinking that I'm still in the blitz phase.

In my defence, the chief reason I continue to use social media is to share the content I create, hoping — in vain — to drive more traffic to my blog, as well as to my Spotify and YouTube channels.

'They get their kicks via different interactive engagements, similar to Ireland's Zoomers cosying up to cocaine as they down less alcohol.'

Even with posts that aren't directly linked to my online material, the idea is that more interaction is better than the opposite in this gig. Or, as I'm wont to say, it's better to be a known loser than an unknown one.

I know, I know, one can reasonably ask what's the point when, after over thirteen years, all my blogs, vlogs and podcasts haven't returned me even a penny in income. I could waste time on worse things, though, couldn't I? The other side to this, of course, is that I could spend my time on more wholesome pursuits.

Poisoned posting

What's more, alongside the changes in netizens' interactions with social media, the platforms themselves have evolved as both they and regulators try to find safer ways to operate. This evolution has further boosted the voice and influence of the haves while simultaneously weakening more so the role of the have-nots.

This is the exact opposite of the fanciful vision that Facebook et al. had at their inception. Aiming to empower the proles has merely resulted in giving greater power to the plutocrats. Plus ça change.

Added to this, the younger generations who grew up with social media are less hung-up about it all. In the same way that Gen Z — or Zoomers, as they're also called — in some high-income nations are drinking less alcohol compared to their predecessors, these younger folk are more inclined to be voyeurs rather than active participants on Facebook and Instagram.

This is not to say that theirs is a healthier way. It's just that they tend to get their kicks via different interactive engagements, similar to Ireland's Zoomers cosying up to cocaine as they down less alcohol. Or, more positively, as has been suggested elsewhere, they use Facebook less as a platform to share personal moments and to socialise virtually than as a source of gathering and sharing information via groups and suchlike.

So as we older generations rethink our relationship with social media, it needn't be a case of complete abstinence. Then again, just as health experts advise about alcohol, the safest amount of online socialising might be zero. And if forced to continue with just one of the two poisons, I'd opt for the liquid kind.
__________________________________________________________
Listen to The Corrigan Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

The WhatsApp voice messages of wrath

@wwaycorrigan

[Listen to an audio version of this blog entry here.]

'Oh for feck sake, not another WhatsApp voice message.'

Through gritted teeth, that's generally how I respond upon receiving a WhatsApp voice message.

One does try, in vain, to let others know one's feelings.

The joy of text

The intensity of this indignation is directly proportional to the length of these "verbal vectors". I'm terming them thus as there's a good chance they are causing me mental harm owing to the ill feeling they generate in me.

If they are no more than thirty seconds in length and don't turn into a verbal volley, then I can deal with them without getting too worked up. (I must also confess here, lest I be called a hypocrite, I have been known to send the odd one in certain circumstances. This, though, is very much the exception. For the most part, I text.)

The thing is, for a not-insignificant number of WhatsApp users the voice message is the default option. In terms of my contacts, it seems that Colombians in particular are big fans of them.

'I find the idea of voice messages quite selfish. More effort is generally required from the recipient rather than the sender.'

Of course, this could simply be a reflection of those I engage with the most on WhatsApp; my bad luck. I can't say with any certainty that most Colombians prefer voice messages to texts. Nor can I say that they are used more frequently here compared to other countries.

Whatever the case, despite my WhatsApp profile About blurb beseeching contacts not to send voice messages — I guess nobody reads what's written in that section — they're something I'm regularly "forced" to tackle.

So why do they rankle with me so much?

For starters, I find the idea of them quite selfish. More effort is generally required from the recipient rather than the sender. Basically, the latter expects the former to listen to a monologue that on occasions can be akin to a mini-podcast in terms of length.

(Just to be clear — lest the hypocrisy charge be levelled at me again — when I send a blog story or podcast or whatever, I'm not demanding that the recipient engages with the content. That's, obviously enough, up to the individual. It's quite different with voice messages.)

At least with a written message it can usually be glanced over to see if it requires "urgent" attention without even entering the application. This can't be done with a voice message. One either has to stop everything one is doing to listen to what was sent or ignore the audio for a time. I usually do the latter.

Vanquishing the voice message

You see, tied in with this is the fact that I use my phone for other audio purposes i.e. listening to podcasts/radio and watching YouTube. I also use it to read books. Voice messages are a greater distraction for all these activities than written messages. Hence the wrath.

In mild mitigation, as a society, we're still trying to settle on a widely accepted etiquette for social media interaction and the like. What one person views as a great innovation is an utter annoyance to another — see, as a further example on a related theme, my previous piece railing against an ever-encroaching Big Tech.

In terms of social media specifically, however, most mental health experts would agree that the best strategy is to use them very sparingly, if at all (see Facebook, Instagram: Killing us softly).

Nonetheless, WhatsApp has now become the chief means of communication for many people. In my line of work, I'd be putting myself at a significant financial disadvantage by not having the app.

As I've said before, such things are merely tools that we must control. We shouldn't let them control us. Yet, it's beyond my control if somebody sends me a WhatsApp voice message.

So surely the brains behind WhatsApp could introduce a version without the voice-message facility or at least have an option inhibiting the ability to receive them, with this clearly displayed for any would-be voice-message sender?

Come on Mr Zuckerberg, you've done far worse to the world. Just when you do roll this out, I want my cut.
_______________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

Dealing with a sexed-up society

@wwaycorrigan

[Listen to an audio version of this blog entry here.]

In a country with an alarmingly high official femicide rate, that the fair treatment of women is never too far off Colombia's news agenda isn't surprising.

Sexual objects ...

Catholic virtues

Of course, there's one thing having grand debates about it in media and politics, quite another effecting meaningful change on the ground. This is particularly so in a region where misogyny appears commonplace.

The UK, on the other hand, superficially at least, appears worlds apart from most of Latin America when it comes to women's rights. Every now and again, however, a high-profile and/or disturbing case sees the issue become headline news, as has happened recently after the abduction and killing of 32-year-old Sarah Everard.

With that particular ongoing case as the backdrop, the broader subject was discussed on a BBC Radio 4 programme by a panel of politicians and experts.

One of the guests was former UK Supreme Court judge, Lord Sumption — a man whose stance on lockdowns I very much support. He commented that in European Catholic countries — he specifically mentioned Poland, Spain, Italy and the Republic of Ireland — incidences of abuse against women are lower compared to others.

I'm not sure where he's getting his figures from on this one, but speaking from an Irish perspective, to say that our strong Catholic heritage has contributed to our supposed "better" treatment of women is absurd, to say the least. On what is a long list of arguments against that, I'll just mention mother and baby homes for one. Abuses simply going unreported must also be taken into account.

That aside, where Lord Sumption may have a point is in terms of our traditional attitudes towards sex, generalising as I am and something that certainly doesn't appear to apply to the newer generations.

What I'm referring to here, with my own Irish Catholic-influenced upbringing in mind, is the way sex was not really something to be discussed openly. Sexy wasn't cool.

'It's this sexual-object idea that in many ways is the thin end of the wedge.'

If a girl or a woman dressed, let's say rather liberally, she was not a good sort. 'Leave that type of thing to the promiscuous English.' (Contrast this with Colombia, another traditionally Catholic country but one that in many ways has been more open about matters of sex, something I addressed in a previous post.)

Linked to this — and I agree that this is probably more a reflection of me rather than Irishmen in general — the idea of wolf-whistling or shouting sexual "obscenities" at women was something I never even considered. After almost ten years living in Colombia, it still unsettles me the way many men here are very forward with women. I'm more in the 'blessed are the meek' camp in this regard.

Objects of desire

So while Catholic Ireland's — not just the church but the state, too — historic treatment of women leaves an awful lot to be desired, viewing them as mere sexual objects hasn't been chief among its sins.

And it's this sexual-object idea that in many ways is the thin end of the wedge. It's also very complex.

From the male perspective, when one is bombarded with very suggestive images/videos of women on a regular basis, well how is one to view them?

OK, you might say just simply don't seek out such material. The thing is, I for one don't. But we have various social media, particularly Instagram from my experiences, that promote what I regard as at least mild porn. (A female friend of mine, one who isn't averse to uploading what could be viewed as suggestive content, agreed with me on this.)

What's more, many of these posts aren't by paid models or virtual sex workers, they are from everyday women voluntarily uploading sexed-up content to public forums.

For sure, if this stays in the virtual world, you could say it's harmless. That is to ignore multifaceted and potentially damaging cyber abuse, though.

You might also argue that women have the right to post whatever they want on social media — free expression and all that. It's not their fault if some men view them in a perverted way. Fair enough.

Nonetheless, men are generally physically stronger and sexually more aggressive than women. Thus, that some cross what can be at times a thin line between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour towards women isn't altogether shocking, especially if they feel they have been "enticed" to do so (just to be clear, there's no thin part of the line when it comes to murdering an innocent victim).

So when trying to combat a serious problem, such publicly available content has the potential to set, nay perpetuate, a narrative in the real world.

On balance, we could do well to actively promote a more sexed-down society, difficult as that may now be.
_______________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

 

Facebook, Instagram: Killing us softly

A few weeks ago on CNÑ (CNN in Spanish that is), in a discussion about social media, an Argentinian expert on the subject predicted that in years to come we'll view our use of Facebook and the like in the same way that most of us view smoking today. 

That is, a dirty, unhealthy habit that we can't believe we actually used to find "cool and sexy".

Insta-life. Or is that Insta-death?

Some people might view such an opinion as rather dramatic. Exaggerated scaremongering from the Argentinian fogey. Maybe so. The jury is still hearing all the evidence on this one, it's not even close to being sent out in order to come back with a verdict yet.

One thing we can say with certainty is that the arrival of social media has led to a seismic change in how we communicate and interact with each other. Save for the invention for real of teleportation, it's hard to see how more virtually connected we can become.

"Physically meeting those we might envy often allays any insecurity issues."

That's the crux of the issue here really: A growing virtual contact at the expense of face-to-face interaction. Worse still — for those on the social-media-is-bad side of things that is — virtual communication, or using our digital gadgets in some way, is dominating even when we are in the company of others.

We've all witnessed it. A group of people at a bar or dinner table or wherever, all with their heads stuck in their personal electronic devices. We shake our heads in disapproval. 

Yet there's a fair chance we've been looked at disapprovingly doing the exact same thing on another occasion. Practically everybody with a smartphone gets "caught" at some stage or another.

A new (dis)order?

The question is, "Is it actually doing us any harm?" Well, we do now have a social media anxiety disorder. A cynic — which I am not, of course — might say that the fact we've "invented" a disorder for it means very little in this day and age.

We've disorders for all sorts of things now where in the past they were simply conditions that required nothing more than a stern "for goodness sake lad, would you pull yourself together", or something to that effect. It's all much more softly-softly now, for better or for worse.

That being said, as documented before, the false impression that social media platforms create of the lives of others can be quite damaging to those susceptible to the "keeping up with the Joneses" condition. "Oh look, there goes Mary on another amazing adventure and here I am stuck in my crappy job." Or, "Bob seems to be doing great with the ladies and I can't hit it off with a single one."

For sure, being envious of others isn't something new, only arriving with social media. It's part of being human. However, our new way of interacting has made it more prevalent, exponentially so. The scale of it has been blown way out of proportion it would appear.

Physically meeting those who we may be resentful towards for whatever reason and, quite literally, seeing "their warts and all", will, more often than not, make us feel a little less insecure about ourselves. 

Social media not only takes that away but it puts us in daily contact with people who we would otherwise know next to nothing about and, I wager, care little about.

Take these (and please, do take them and send them off to some other planet) Instagram influencers. Young, pretty people — it's highly unlikely they'll either be the "wrong" side of 40 or not physically attractive — who make a living out of simply posting about their lives.

"Facebook and the like are dumbing us down."

Fair play to them. They're working the system. It's those who follow them, who give them this platform, those are the ones I question.

OK, if it's somebody who travels or the like, somebody who has interesting, informative snippets to share, there's merit to that. The thing is, many of these influencers don't. White, or whatever colour you want, trash.

Before I'm accused of being a hypocrite, I am fully aware that I play this game as well. As an unpaid blogger and podcaster, I need to use all outlets available to get the messages I write and talk about out there. 

The hope is that what I do will reach more and more people, eventually putting me, brand "Wrong Way" so to put it, in a position to be a conduit for companies to advertise via me and such like.

Obviously, time is ticking on that one. Or maybe I'm already past my "use by" date. I'm just refusing to accept it. Perhaps I should go underground now, back to unspoilt nature.

Whatever the case, I like to think that I use and take advantage of social media — the ideal scenario — more than the other way around. I like to think that, that is. I could be wrong.

Light up, dumb down

We mentioned the seismic shift that has taken place with social media. As a species, we've gone through this before. The printing press, the advent of radio and TV. Massive game-changers.

So rather than seeing the "new kids in town" as dangerous, perhaps we should take a more benign view. After all those older three, although TV to a lesser extent, in my opinion, haven't done us any real harm, have they?

The key difference for me is that all those, in their more dominant days, were agents of positive social change and largely educational.

At this remove and considering how the majority of us currently use social media and, just as importantly, are used by them, we can't view today's dominators in the same light. On the contrary, they seem to be dumbing us down.

They might leave us feeling a bit lightheaded, even sick at times, but the high is worth it. Gotta light? I need my fix.
___________________________________
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan - The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".
Listen to The Colombia Cast podcast here.

We are what we tweet

In these social media times we live in, it seems that virtual reality has become reality. 

Or at least our smartphone updates have allowed those who read/view them to believe they know us and make judgements about us, even if they've only briefly met us or, indeed, have never met us at all.

'I tweet, therefore I am.'

Living in a social media world

Of course, social media profiling is not just a lonely layperson's pastime. Companies often check out the Facebook pages, tweets, Instagram photos and what have you of prospective employees to 'get a feel' for the person in question before saying yea or nay. 

In some cases, that may be pre-interview selection, thus a decision is taken on your personality or suitability before they've actually met you. At times that might be a good thing; on other occasions not so.

It does, nonetheless, beg the question: Does how we portray ourselves on social media accurately reflect how our real lives actually are?

We may post fairly honestly, but for the majority of us, these are just snapshots in time, brief moments detailing some particular aspect of our life that we feel is worthy of sharing. (Whether we should bother to share these things at all is a valid consideration; maybe those of us who do it will get over this phase as we come to terms with the continuously evolving social media landscape.)

The more mundane, everyday aspects of our lives usually aren't publicised — at least that's how it is for most people. It's a highlights package of sorts, and often a very skewed one.

Moreover, what is put out there is open to falsities and manipulation. Just as someone can lie to you about themselves in person, it can be done, but with greater ease, virtually.

In terms of on-line discussions — Facebook debates for example — there's the issue of tone and sentiment perhaps not coming across as intended by the writer. 

Linked to that, some people can write in a rather aggressive, argumentative manner when in reality they're big softies, so to put it. 'Virtual warriors, real-life sheep', one could say.

As has been posted on this blog before, all these social media outlets are just tools and, like any tool, they can be used in a productive way or improperly. 

A lot of the time user restraint is advised. Completely switching off from them may be almost impossible for some people in certain lines of work, but letting them dominate your life doesn't seem the best idea.

There is a real world out there, distinct from the social media one. It's not always the case that 'we are what we tweet', despite what some people may think.
______________________________________
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan - The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".