I found several posts on Facebook that made me stop and think today - and not for good reasons.
The first raised an issue that I would have thought is pretty current in Scotland: can the infrastructure of Scotland's island communities stand up to the waves of tourists now visiting? (In an aside: of course it can). It wasn't the issue that got one person agitated: it was the fact that this has been talked about 'all summer' (it's August, ffs!) and has only now been blogged/tweeted/Facebooked about by an SNP MP. It's not like the MP is out of date. People were talking about this in Islay when I was there last week. And if you live in a Highland or Island local authority, you know the problems facing rural communities where infrastructure is concerned. And there's no doubt the Scottish Government will have to do more to support them if the expansion of tourism is to go ahead. There's been a spate of FB posts like this recently: eagle-eyed Facebookers track comments and quotes and announce triumphantly: this article was published 2 years/six months/3 weeks ago. Doesn't mean the article is out of date, although spotters obviously think so. And the discussion closes down.
I replied to a post in a group (about movies) raising what I thought was a valid issue for Hollywood: the refusal of the Oscars to accept that acting is an art and a skill, some of which you can learn but some of it innate, and talents are equally spread among the sexes. There is no reason for the women's and men's Oscars to be separated according to sex. Only the acting awards do this. It would be patronising to have a category for 'Best Female Director', wouldn't it? Did I get a discussion about the issue? Well, you know the answer. Reaction instantly turned to over-reaction: I was accused of being a 'pseudo-feminist.' (Nothing pseudo here, I promise you). I should read the article before commenting. (Thank you, I had). The discussion didn't close down this time because the person who had originally written the article intervened (they're all volunteer contributors - who I notice are also subject to insult from the punters). Unlike the other contributors (big fans of the Hollywood machine that I consider death to creativity and a block on the advancement of women, black and Hispanic directors and writers) he addressed the issue. It went very quiet after that with just comments about how the group need not - and probably should not - reflect the interests of Hollywood. The over-reactors vanished, having I think nothing to say.
The final comment I'd like to make about Facebook is to marvel at the number of experts we have out there. We can't get people - especially women - to stand for election in local councils or at Holyrood or Westminster. But if the political parties are looking for people with a political insight, they can look on Facebook. So Emmanuel Macron, elected in May, is already summed up as 'a clown.' Trump is a dangerous lunatic. Angela Merkel is dismissed as 'Mutti' and lacks any kind of political sense (How has she managed to survive this long in the pressure cooker of EU politics?).
Frankly I find some of my fellow Facebookers embarrassing. Their language is atrocious. They have no political vocabulary. They focus on personalities, not on issues or policy. Above all, they add nothing to the discussion and usually bring any conversation to a complete halt.
Feel free to prove me wrong: I'd love to see a Facebook group that actually has a good discussion going on.
No comments:
Post a Comment