Language allows us to communicate clearly, but it also allows us to obfuscate. That people use language to mislead, misdirect, and corrupt frustrates me. There are so many other, more beautiful options.

Like books. I always want more.

There’s an adage about knowledge. To understand something, you need to be able to explain it clearly to someone else. Learn one, do one, teach one. This is true for language as well, though it’s often ignored. People regularly use words they misunderstand. The confusion can sometimes be problematic.

Take “natural.” ‘Natural’ simply means “of nature.” Something natural is not manmade. Along the way, however, people added moral values to those definitions. “Manmade” is intrinsically bad now, especially when natural is an option, “natural” being good. Or so some would have you believe.

How far we’ve fallen from being enthralled by Disney’s World of Tomorrow when “manmade” and “new” were seen as exciting alternatives. These days, people are re-embracing listeria in milk. Louis Pasteur must be rolling in his grave.

Gwyneth Paltrow once declared in an interview, “I don’t think anything that’s natural can be bad for you.” Arsenic and black mould would like to have a word.

If we’re vague and misguided on the meaning of natural, what then do we mean when we use the word, “important?” The dictionary tells me ‘important’ is an adjective indicating “something of great significance or value; and something likely to have a profound effect on success, survival, or well-being.”

The definition doesn’t say that important is good, only that it’s significant. Most of the time, definitions are judgment-free. This is true when it comes to “important” people as well. They’re important because they’ve had an impact, but that’s not necessarily a good thing.

Josef Stalin was impactful.

The introduction of social media was important, although, like many such events, its significance can only be appreciated in the aftermath. It takes time to understand the impact certain changes have on society.

When we were designing our landing pages on MySpace, did we imagine that social media, far from connecting the world, would leave it more vulnerable to takeover and collapse? Did we think for a moment that the tool touted as a miracle of connection would instead leave us feeling isolated and alone?

FOMO arrived with social media.

The emotional and mental impacts of social media are far-reaching, and I’m not convinced social media as we now experience it is a net good. It opens up communication, but it opens up communication without fact-checking, and people aren’t discriminating consumers of information. The consequences of the lies and propaganda that circulate freely on social media are severe. The situation will get worse as platforms roll out AI accounts.

Democracy is currently under threat the world over, as is the idea of equality of prosperity. Power and wealth are being concentrated in a literal handful of people, the age of the robber barons is back, and the most popular response across developed nations – outside of universities – appears to be social justice warrioring on our platforms of choice.

I like Threads and BlueSky, others may choose Facebook or Twitter – I’ll deadname Elon Musk’s propaganda site forever – but what we have in common is the sense that the sharing we do of our points of view and opinions matters. The dopamine hit from approval in the form of likes doesn’t hurt either.

Venting our spleen and posting online makes us feel like we’ve done something. We’ve shown the politicians currently threatening war and economic devastation a thing or two – our thread about it got over a thousand likes. Maybe we’ll go viral one day. That’d be cool. Unfortunately, most of the time, ranting on socials is screaming into the void.

It’s not important. It has no real significance.

The ranting satisfies an atavistic need, however, so we don’t take to the streets anymore, not like people used to in the face of corruption and government failures. Remember the US Wall Street occupation? France still keeps its hand in, but for the most part, we don’t organize or push back like we did. We’re complacent. We’re quiet because we think sharing online is taking action.

Social media is important, for sure, but the question to ask, is for whom? Shifting people to a life lived online appears to be creating passive populations that mistake complaints posted on their representative’s Facebook with fighting for change.

The introduction of social media has been wildly important to our world. But, like natural, that’s not necessarily good.

---

---