College Humor had a bit that called Facebook "The Site That Commits Treason & Tells You What Your Parents Are Doing".
They (and the author here) aren't wrong.<p>But what am I supposed to advise them to use?<p>The article doesn't make any suggestions on alternatives.
It links another article he wrote, which also doesn't suggest anything.<p>* Instagram is picture focused, which doesn't fit with 90% of my parent's posts.<p>* Twitter is public by default, which is less privacy than the soft-wall provided by FB "Friends".
Maybe everyone could use private twitter accounts.. But the article argues<p>> "It (FB) is a megaphone and an amplifier of extreme views, easily disproven conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, superstition, magic cures, disinformation, controversy and hyper-effective propaganda."<p>If that's true of Facebook, it's certainly in abundance in twitter!<p>* Maybe Mastodon? They don't want or need to understand federation. None of their friends use it, so they can't keep in touch with their old co-worker from 3 jobs back.<p>* Discord/Telegram/Signal/Wire - They're all intended for live/dynamic use, while FB excels at async. Sure, you can go back and reply to old things, but that's not the intent or way things are typically used.<p>* The best I can think of right now is regular old Email.. It's pushed-based, and sends to exactly who you want it to. It handles comments (replies) and it can embed pictures/links/etc.
> Older people are less likely ... to be able to understand the difference between legitimate news and lies<p>Why do you think older people are more foolish than younger people?<p>This is so patronising! I'm wouldn't dream of telling my parents what to read or not read.
Also, get yourself off Facebook.<p>Honestly, ripping that bandaid off was one of the best decisions I made for my own mental health, my time, and my ability to properly assess which relationships in my life were worth maintaining. (Turns out it wasn't the hundreds of people I was connected with on Facebook.)
I'm sorry but this is not a compelling argument and the author is missing the point entirely.<p>My folks use FB to keep in contact with a large circle of family and friends and it works very well for that, moreover, this is the case for literally 100's of millions if not billions.<p>I don't use it, but there's no reason for people not to if they find it useful.
"Older people are less likely to be tech-savvy, less likely to use ad-blockers, less likely to be able to understand the difference between legitimate news and lies, and they’re more likely to spend longer time on Facebook and share more information on Facebook."<p>While I would like to say I agree with this, it's due to confirmation bias and an availability heuristic. If you don't provide data to support these claims then you're assuming your readers are no better than the subject of your post.
sure, you can get off facebook the site, but if you still want to keep in touch w/ family and friends, you'll most likely use "whatsapp" which is owned by fb. thoughts?