Pastor Ken
I belong to the Baby Boomer generation. After graduating from high school, my classmates all took different paths. Many left Hong Kong to continue their studies in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and Canada. At first, we still had correspondence with one another, but later our communication tapered off because of a lack of common topics. After many of us got married and had our own families, a majority of us lost contact in the next few decades.
In the past few years, due to the prevalence of electronic devices, everyone has a mobile phone. Social networks are so easy to use that old classmates and colleagues have gradually reconnected and formed online groups.
However, what subjects should we cover for our online discussion??
Once in our group of classmates, someone brought up a topic involving politics. At the beginning, the two individuals were able to express their different opinions in a calm manner. After a few back-and-forth exchanges of messages, the discussion became heated. A third classmate tried to maintain an impartial stance. Yet another one attempted to mend the situation. Those who weren’t interested jumped in to call it quits. In the end, several classmates withdrew from the group.
Think about it. We haven’t been in touch for decades, and our political views, values, life experiences, etc. have changed a lot. Differences are inevitable. Sadly, social media texting often lacks context to allow an adequate explanation. Even with emoticons, the ability to express emotions is limited. In addition, everyone’s choice of words may have different connotation. Once a misunderstanding develops, clarification with a few words only makes things worse.
Besides politics, another topic to avoid is religion. Personal beliefs are usually a result of years of searching and life experiences. Some people passionately pursued the truth at a young age, only to give it up later on. Others who began with a skeptical outlook on life eventually took a more responsible approach. Once a belief is developed, it isn’t easy to compromise. How many of us would adjust our stance on our convictions based on someone’s online communication? It’s okay to express one’s opinion, but the social network of old friends is obviously not the platform to judge or convert others.
In the few social groups I belong to, I observe a certain pattern after a year or so. Only about one-tenth of the members are active in posting. The silent majority probably isn’t interested in making themselves known. My observation is that most of us are more concerned about the personal stories. It is also well received if we poke fun at ourselves and share some humor without discussing race, sexuality, politics, or social strata.
As for world events, celebrity news, research data, etc., it’s prudent to leave it to others to conduct their own research. You can try to clarify if you are a professional in a particular field. Otherwise, reposting others’ posts without additional commentary can create confusion among your friends as to your stance. If two or three members of the group are interested in a special topic, it is better to move the discussion offline, while maintaining the inclusiveness of the large group.
The bottom line of using social networks is that those who post have the right to publish, and those who receive have the right to ignore. If we respect one another in the spirit of human decency, social networks will surely enhance our life.
