Social Networking Friends and Foes, Real People and Fakes

     Just yesterday, two separate times, I was logged into Facebook and was reading some posts, Two status updates stood out and reflected my own feelings about my many of my own social networking experiences. One person posted (and I'm paraphrasing): "Facebook is ridiculous. Want to know what I think? I wonder who among you are really my friends. This includes those of you whom I have met in real life. I spend so much time looking at your pages and signing a bunch of your petitions and I feel like my time is being wasted when so many of you don't take the time to look at my material. Let's face it, folks. Who among us have real friends whom we have met online? Who among us would talk to each other outside of Facebook?"
     A few hours later, I saw another post on my homepage. This person posted (and I'm paraphrasing): "Folks, can any of us really trust anyone we meet only online? Online contact does not work like real life. Online, people can too easily hide behind their computer screens and lie to you about who they are and what they do. Don't trust people even when they present themselves as having missing loved ones; they are not saints and cannot be really trusted. Don't trust people even when they are advocates for children; they are not saints and cannot really be trusted. It doesn't matter what people pose as or say about themselves. You cannot trust anyone if you have met them only online."
     I hate to agree with these statements as total truth but as I have had many painful online experiences that resemble that of countless other users, who have placed trust in online people who have proved to have violated that trust. I have seen too many people who have not been what they and their devoted followers, have claimed that they were. In person, is is easier (unless you have trouble reading nonverbal cues), to determine if another person's body language and demeanor point to ulterior motives and social masking, indicating deceit. It is simply so much easier to fake it and deceive, online and safely behind a computer screen and to use ostensibly nice and friendly behavior to gain the trust of people before scamming you.
     I think that most of us perceive and treat online friends differently from in-person, offline friends. In real life, I seriously doubt that any of us would approach a stranger or someone whom we don't know well, and tell them, "Hello, --------------------------, I'm adding you to my contacts because someone has suggested you to me and because we have mutual friends." But many of us do this very thing online, to connect with new online contacts. We "add" other users as "friends." What does it mean to be or have Facebook friends vs. offline, in-person friends? How did "friend" ever become a verb? Now, we say that we "friend" or "unfriend" people! In "real life," if any of us approached people the way we do on social networks, "friending" new users, it would be called stalking. But I think this sort of behavior is a online habit among us who have causes where we seek to raise awareness for, or who who have businesses and are seeking to sell products and is common among nonprofit organizations so they can shore up support and donations. "friends" on Facebook and other social networks, are often more like online acquaintances whom we correspond with.
     Another common online practice that would kill most offline friendships, is the way that, after exchanging initial friendly words with newly added people, we never speak to each other again. This has happened to me so often that I have come to expect it. It is like I add so many of these users and they apparently forget that they have ever connected with me. I don't know if this is because of their default homepage settings where they create "friends lists" where my posts do not show up in many newsfeeds, have "hidden" my posts from view, or use social networks sporadically. But it makes me wonder, Why did I "friend" these people in the first place?
     The fact that we see online friends as separate from offline friends is the way that we so often handle differences with online friends. So many users are quick to use the "Unfriend" button and, less often, the "Block" and even the "Report" button for things that we would much more readily forgive an offline, "real-life" friend for. In real life, we are much more prone to work out differences and bear with each other, where online, users are much less likely to give other users  benefit of the doubt, and to use the "Unfriend," and even the "Block" or "Report" buttons. For example, last year, a public scandal in the life of a certain politician erupted and his reputation was destroyed, even though he expressed contrition for his actions. Nevertheless, many of his Twitter "followers" quickly deserted him. If these "followers" had known this politician offline, I daresay they would have been more disposed to give him the benefit of the doubt and stand by him. In my experience, I have often been "unfriended," sometimes "blocked," and in a known recent case, I have been "reported," because of offensive posts or private messages. I'm sure that if these users had known me personally, they would have been more likely to work out our differences and be reconciled.
     I knw that many users use social networks only to "have fun" and keep up with family and friends and want no part of causes. In a way, I don't blame them a bit! Yet in a troubled, embattled, dying world like ours, I see it as morally unacceptable to "leave the world alone" and not embrace any cause or make some attempt to make a difference to the best of one's ability. And the price for raising awareness and advocacy are that we have to open ourselves up to people, all kinds of people whom we may not otherwise, and it poses a challenge to protect ourselves and our social networks even as we seel to make a difference. This is why, sadly, as the users whose statuses I paraphrased earlier, we so often encounter the darker side of social networking and the shallowness and the pretense so often seen on social networks.
     Online self-expression are often easier than offline self-expression. I think many people are like me; it is often easier to open up and express ourselves online than offline. In "real life," I often clam up, especially in group settings of any kind. But online, I have felt more comfortable in self-expression, revealing things that I have never felt comfortable saying to most people whom I have known personally. The dark side of this is that it is easy to overshare online and I have often seen users share things about themselves that I felt were not anyone's business, including mine. I find it difficult to tell, sometimes, what many users mean by what they post, and it drives me crazy when they beg for help and don't provide any context.
     Online, I find that it is much easier to find people who share my values and my goals. The tradeoffs are that, almost always, these are people who are located far from me and have no shared history with me. With many people in "real life," there is usually more proximity and more shared history, but often we do not share many values or goals in common. For example, online, I know of people who have shown much support for my causes but have proved to be unavailable when I feel the need to contact them with questions. Offline, most of my family, friends and acquaintances, are those who see no need to support any causes and see what I do as useless and that I should leave my efforts to "the experts."
     In my current petition campaign, I know that I take it personally and feel it as a "slap in the face" when people show no support for my petition or make any effort to educate themselves as to its importance through reading the text in my petition on the page. I have thousands of "friends" but only hunderds of signatures, many not even from these in my network. Most people, depending on their default settings (unless they have "hidden" me in their newsfeeds), who use Facebook or other social networks regularly, no doubt have seen my posts about my petition. And yet, many seem to simply be ignoring it. I suspect that these "nonsupporters" may feel that their signatures don't count, feel that I may "hit them up" later for donations (despite my disclaimers), may not trust me, or may not even know about autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) and don't care to learn. And so many, I fear, have their own agendas and causes and are happy to see me support them, but are not willing to support mine.
These "nonsupporters" usually don't know me, and I doubt that they value their relationships with me and so where they are concerned, expectations need to be kept low. One user bluntly posted on my "Birthday wish" "event" page, "I don't do petitions."
      Social networks often unmask the real motives and thoughts of those whom we know in "real life." In my online experiences, many local "friends" and some relatives, have "unfriended" me without notice, and in one known case, one has blocked me totally. In every one of thse cases, I did not suspect that anything was amiss in my relationships with these people until I added them to my online networks and found myself removed from theirs. And it is well-documented that many marriages have been ruined when when one souse has uncovered evidence or secrets about the other spouse online. And It is also well-known that many people have lost their jobs when their bosses or co-workers have learned things about them online. Social networks have forever changed how we relate to each other.
      Social networks are neither good or bad. They are just a tool. Behind social networks are people who use them, either for good or for evil. Because so many use social networks for evil, we who use them for good need to be even more discerning about everyone we meet online, realizing that all other users need to be equally discerning in relating to us. But in our discernment and healthy skepicism, let's not miss the the good, honest, caring, trustworthy people who are using the networks for good.

    
    

When People Re-Invent Themselves

          For many years, a woman used her experiences as a September 11 survivor to connect with other survivors. She had not only lost her fiance in the horrible bombing but she was in the blast herself and saw others die before her very eyes. She had sustained burns that landed her in a hospital. She won the trust, admiration and love of other survivors; she organized events and support groups that were geared to survivors only. When they heard her story, the others expressed amazement, exclaiming, "How can you be so positive!" and "Your story makes our problems seem so minor!" This woman's courage and story won the attention of the media and an article was written about this woman. She met the Mayor and then the President. Other survivors saw her as an indespensible, courageous, remarkable mentor and giver. What was wrong with her story? None of it happened! She had no fiance, was not in the twin towers or even in the US at the time!
          When I was new to Facebook, it was through a missing person advocate that I was introduced to the world of missing people. Before that I saw stories of a few tragic kids on talk shows. As a mom, I was utterly frustrated that missing people were not getting much-deserved attention. So I began using Facebook. This advocate was a country singer who worked with families with missing loved ones and had a fan page full of missing person posters and information. I was stirred by his devotion and passion for missing people. Many people looked to him as their hope to bring home their missing loved ones home. He began recruiting volunteers for his nonprofit. The problem with this advocate? He was not what he said he was!
          Well over a year ago, I followed a case on a popular TV talk show. During that time, the host related two shocking stories of ladies who had been attacked by having been doused with acid. Along with everyone else, I was horrified at this brutality and felt sympathy for these unfortunate women. What was the problem with the tragic story of the woman with the even more-scarred face? Another person did not put them there, as she had claimed. She had done it to herself and staged it all to look like a terrible attack on her!
          A couple of years ago, I was watching my local evening news. The TV anchor reported about an aged woman who bravely reported her brutal rape to authorities. She has major physical challenges. Along with my family, I was angry that someone was evil, cowardly and low enough to take such advantage of a helpless, powerless, aged woman, and violate her. What was wrong that we were producing so many monsters with no empathy? But I was amazed at this lady's courage. What was wrong with her tragic story and her bravery? None of it happened; she made it all up!
         Months ago, we heard the heartbreaking story of a woman who was diagnosed with cancer. She was scared, overwhelmed and badly in need of help. Her family was worried about her. Her story came to the media's attention. People, deeply moved by this desperate woman's sad story, rallied around her, surrounding her with prayers, monetary donations and other support. Mention the word cancer and people are always moved to care and to help an individual or a family living with it. What was wrong with this woman's sad plight? It was all made up! She didn't have cancer!
          A couple of years ago, I was looking at posts on my Facebook newsfeed. I was drawn in by the heart-wrenching story and poster of a mother  and her child, who had been abducted. We Facebook users who cared about missing people circulated the available information on this mother and child. Their troubling story made news headlines. Many resources were poured into the search for this mother/daughter pair. The public was deeply concerned and wanted to help; their story touched the whole US. The trouble with it? This mom had staged her abduction and taken her daughter to Disneyland!
          Many years ago, many individuals came forward to disclose their Vietnam Veteran status and were accorded much-deserved "war hero" status and the praise and acclaim that every veteran should have as proper thanks for their brave service to their country. These people received financial benefits and entitlements that were reserved for veterans. The trouble with many of these veterans? They did not exist! They had never been in Vietnam or had not not been in any combat zone! Many years ago, a popular book documented many of their stories of "stolen valor."
          Years ago, a Wall Street stockholder won the trust of many investors, who trusted all their $$$ and their life savings to him. They sensed that their assets were in good hands and they were not concerned. These invsetors rested assured that their life savings would be there when they needed that money. This person was obviously a person of good will and integrity. What was wrong with him and the outcome for his investors? Their money was all gone; their life savings had been wiped out! It went to line HIS pockets!
          In my first year as a Facebook user, I added a person who was a law enforcement officer (LEO). In the world of missing people and crime victim advocacy. LEO's are generally help in the highest esteem as they are the center of investigations and their work is seen closely; the risks LEO's take to safeguard our freedoms and their work are seen as it really is. This was only one of a number of LEO's I added. Many others in the world of missing people also added this LEO. What was the trouble with this one LEO? He had never worn "the shield"!
          Over a  couple of years ago, a girl's sad story of being brutally gang-raped was featured on a TV talk show. Four boys had done this to her. Immediately, the public was outraged at these horrible boys for this violent crime and deeply sympathetic toward this poor girl. What kind of monsters were we raisng these days? we wondered. Why are kids getting so violent? What was wrong with this girl's traumatic experience? It never happened! She made the entire story up!
         The Amber Alert program, though far from perfect, saves the lives of many abducted children who are fortunate enough to have witnesses or other evidence to their kidnaps so that they can meet the criteria for this lifesaving program. Without this program, many abductions would probably end in tragedy. What is wrong with some of these Amber Alerts, then? They are based on abductions thatr have never happened! Such Amber Alerts are frequent enough that we, the public, are sometimes urged to fact-check any Amber Alert or other missing-person alert before circulating it.
          A woman who had formerly dated a popular athlete went public with her story of his rape of her in a hotel. We sympathized with her and looked upon the athlete with suspicion. Did he do it?  I was sick and tired of these celebrity scandals and stars thinking that they were above the law! And why, would he choose to rape this woman when, as a star, he "had his pick" in women to date? The reason for that? He never raped this woman in the first place! She had made her survivor story up.
          On my page, it seemed that maybe up to about half of those in my network are survivors of various traumas in life, particularly abuse in childhood. Some seemed to be almost proud of their survivor stories. One user posted around the Christmas holidays one year something like, "Give other survivors a gift this holiday. Tell the world 'I am a survivor' on your status. Give many other survivors the courage they need to come forward with their stories! Be empowered!" I see nothing wrong with this; we need to break the code of silence that surrounds so many invisible needs. The trouble with this? One day, I saw a post by a Facebook user. He posted something like this for his status: "Please stop setting up fake survivor profiles to get our attention and our sympathy. You are wasting our time and resources."
          What do these examples all have in common? They involve people making up stories about themselves, pretending to be what they are not, sometimes even taking money or other resources, and in all cases shamefully betraying people's trust and misusing and expoiting people's compassion and good will. These are people have who re-invented themselves and their lives, driven by the urge to alter how people perceived them and related to them. They didn't like the dreary, lackluster reality of their lives. The reality wasn't good enough for them. That reality of themselves and their lives would never get them the attention, the admiration, the fame, the sympathy, or even the money or other resources that they wanted so desperately. So they decided to turn to lives of deception, manipulation and manufactured, re-invented lives and selves. They got to enjoy what they so longed for, temporarily, but as lies are, theirs ultimately caught up with them!
          There's nothing wrong with the longing for affirmation, belonging, appreciation and to make a significant difference with our lives. There is nothing wrong even with the desire to increase our assets. I have these desires and longings. We all do if we know ourselves and are in touch with our feelings. Many of these desires are good and praiseworthy if they move us to get "plugged in" and to connect with good causes or charities, things greater than and beyond ourselves. Wanting more money and things aren't necessarily bad if they motivate us to work hard for them and to improve our lives so we can contribute to society. It turns to greed when we want $$$ and things just for our own consumption and pleasure.  Wanting to be important to people is not a bad thing, as the Bible uses this desire as the basis as to a motive for the way we should live our lives. It tells us, "He who loses his life will find it" and "He who wants to be the greatest of all should be the servant of all." It's not our drives for these things that in themselves get us in trouble. It's trying to satisfy these desires in wrong, immoral ways.
          The outcome of hoax stories like this, the ones mentioned which are only examples, only generate an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust. Thanks to this sad phenomenon, we have entered the age of background checks. These background checks can be only expected to increase the more and more of these atrocities come to light. It is the information age, after all. We now live in a world where we are, in the court of public opinion, often regarded as guilty until proved innocent. Also, these who invent these hoaxes not only hurt and betray those who trust them as true and honest, but they hurt and cast suspicion on the many whose stories, unlike theirs, are true.
          We live in a culture where to be ordinary and average almost equals being worthless and desperate, troubled people see being average and ordinary as so unbearable to they have to feel the need to fake being something other than their average selves and re-invent their lives. I don't see any solution to this hoax phenomenon, but when such individuals' lies are found out, maybe seeing these people being held accountable for their actions will be a strong deterrent to many others. Maybe being true and real, however bored or unhappy we may be with our reality, is the most exciting reality of all.