Are 'Social' Networks Truly Social?

Simon Sinek, in his book Leaders Eat Last, argues that homo sapiens (wise men!) have survived and prospered much better than all the other animals on our little planet. While it is true we have the use of our neocortex - our complex, problem-solving brain, we also have the remarkable ability to cooperate and work with others. Other creatures have remained, for the most part, the same. They have simply adapted to their existing environment or perished. But not us; by working together and solving problems as the human race grew, we have been able to mould our environment to suit our needs. That's why we no longer live in caves and die young. (However, we may now be moulding our environment in the wrong direction! For example Hebei province in China has a huge problem with it's belching smokestacks. It recently announced their solution - it will relocate them to Africa and Latin America!!!)

Nature has hard-wired us for face-to-face contact that includes touch, eye contact and smiles. Hence Sinek says, "... nothing can replace face-to-face meetings for social animals like us." Otherwise why do thousands of podcasters and bloggers feel the need to meet in person in Las Vegas every year at their BlogWorld conference? Why don't they just meet online? Because we are social animals and we need to know that we belong. Indeed there are those who say that our motivation to form and maintain close social bonds is as strong as our need for food and water!

So if this is all true, then I have to ask myself are 'Social' Networks really social? They all claim to be and are very popular - Email, Twitter, Twitter DM, Facebook, Facebook Chat, Google, Skype, Instagram , Linkedin etc. etc. Facebook alone has 500 million users! It has to be all good, or is it?

Social comes from the word society. The purpose of a society is basically for the protection of every individual who is part of that group - be it a country, ethnic group, family or business. 'Social' networks appeal to our need to be connected, but do they protect us, nourish us, and feed us in the way our basic nature requires. When we project ourselves through 'social' networking we have the opportunity to edit and touchup the information so as to leave a good impression. In real time that's not always possible. What you see, hear  and observe is what you get!  And face-to-face takes place in real time.

Google Image

This is not to say there are not many advantages to 'social' networking. It keeps us connected to friends  (and perhaps a few make believe friends as well!) and it's wonderful for business. But as important as 'social' networking is, it can never replace our need for true bonding with live people.

Probably there are levels of true social bonding that nurture our lives and give it real meaning. Obviously, the deepest level is with a loving partner followed by true friends and relatives. Next, we have a need to belong to meaningful groups where we feel connected and secure. Some people might have a close relationship with an animal such as a dog or a cat.

In my humble opinion I would locate 'social' networking to the last place. Yes, it does play an important role in our lives but should never be used to replace the natural social bonds we need as humans, especially our ability to reach out and care for one another.

I never thought I would quote Dale Carnegie (How to Win Friends and Influence People) who once wrote, "You can make more friends in two months by becoming interested in other people than you can in two years of trying to get other people interested in you." 

And that's Dick's View of the World this Week