Skip to main content

Enough is Enough

Enough is Enough

raefil said:
Facebook works for me as I only have close friends on there. Ive used it to build up a family history of what my kids have been doing, i do put the odd anecdote, on there, but in the main its used mainly for messenger, which is invaluable.

Im seriously considering my future on twitter as it really can be a cesspit, as you say.

Ive had a few people post questionable stuff that pop up on my FB feed I just get rid.
Click to expand...
Ha, this is me Raef.... I have the grand total of 5 friends on Facebook... they are genuine people that i want to be friends with

Two of them are my son and his wife which is great because through them i get to see what is happening with my Grandkids..... Photos etc

Its funny that you talk about family history through facebook - i have a distant cousin in America who i didnt know existed and he contacted me through facebook out of the blue.

With big help from facebook, he managed to trace our family history on my Mums side back to 1800 and he published a recent family tree chart with photos of everyone, the majority of which were taken from facebook.

It turned out that My Mums Grandad had 8 siblings, 6 of whom had emigrated to the USA ( Michigan ) in 1913 and as a result, there are now 526 of my distant cousins living out there !!!!
 
Regardless said:
Interesting small case study is a conversation I had with @Mickypne this afternoon on the Labour Party Cockwombles thread.

He had a headline story thrust onto his Twitterfeed today about a dozen Labour Party members/councillors being suspended for alleged antisemitism. So it’s presented as a fairly big story to him and he’s (not unreasonably) on that thread wondering why no one’s talking about it.

I did a Google search (not exhaustive) and found only three hits for the story on the whole internet (2 from the Peterborough Telegraph and one from Cambridge News) - so no wonder no one is talking about it on here! But that’s not his fault or any other forum member’s failing.

It just feels like mischief-making and sowing of division by Twitter- trying to stir “conversation” on controversial topics. I guess most of us will recognise that they manipulate us like that.
Click to expand...
Yes it definitely does that. I think it's simply based on algorithms which look at what posts you look at the most. I got that story, but then I've looked at a lot of Labour-related posts over the years.

Problem - how many people rely solely on social media for their news and are either not intelligent enough, or are unable to critically think, or are brainwashed into accepting what they read as being fact?
 
jcfartpants said:
Yes it definitely does that. I think it's simply based on algorithms which look at what posts you look at the most. I got that story, but then I've looked at a lot of Labour-related posts over the years.

Problem - how many people rely solely on social media for their news and are either not intelligent enough, or are unable to critically think, or are brainwashed into accepting what they read as being fact?
Click to expand...


On the other hand, people watch the BBC and Sky and believe what they are telling them.

If you wanted to know how PNE are doing would you (a) use BBC Sport, (b) use Sky Sports, or (c) read Budgie’s blog?

As for politicians, shite the lot of em! 🤣
 
Walton said:
On the other hand, people watch the BBC and Sky and believe what they are telling them.

If you wanted to know how PNE are doing would you (a) use BBC Sport, (b) use Sky Sports, or (c) read Budgie’s blog?

As for politicians, shite the lot of em! 🤣
Click to expand...
Whatever you think of BBC/Sky, their output is going to be a million times more reliable and balanced than anything on social media.
 
I don't twit and I hate it when people on Here put links to it instead of their own comment. As for Instagram a big no not a clue how to use it Facebook I will avoid for the 4 days.
 
From a media perspective you used to have to be qualified of a fashion to get a job that ultimately ended up with your thoughts on print or a radio / tv show
Now it seems the only qualification is to have an opinion that individuals seem to think must be shared and even more so understood and agreed with even if it makes as much sense as slamming your head in a door whilst eating jelly
 
Last edited:
jcfartpants said:
Whatever you think of BBC/Sky, their output is going to be a million times more reliable and balanced than anything on social media.
Click to expand...


You call people unintelligent and brainwashed for believing the shite on social media and then go on to defend the BBC and Sky?

Are you trying to tell me that the BBC and Sky are impartial?
 
Walton said:
You call people unintelligent and brainwashed for believing the shite on social media and then go on to defend the BBC and Sky?

Are you trying to tell me that the BBC and Sky are impartial?
Click to expand...
Compared to the random postings of Dan6537843567 on Twitter, they are a million times more impartial, and if you don't think so, you can at least take it to Ofcom.
 
Social media would not exist if there were not many positive elements and I have enjoyed reading about family contacts through Facebook.
However even here we can see how friendly discussion can turn, often very quickly into disagreement and insults. It is the latter that we want to avoid and what the boycott of social media over the weekend is supposed to be highlighting.
I have a couple of friends who are always on facebook. It will be interesting to see if they can keep away for 3 days.
 
Back
Top