We need to stop thinking of social networks as anything other than "social interaction".
If a person feels guilt, anger, envy etc. when others tell them their opinion, they will feel so regardless of the medium on which the message was delivered.
But it's much easier to blame social networks than fixing one's own attitude. (similar to how people would prefer to ban good television than teach their children about the difference between acted and real violence ... or the whole boobies thing)
I don't think he was ever blaming the people he's connected to on Facebook. He never indicated that the people were even directing their posts at him.
I actually think it was a mature thing for him to do. He noticed that one of his behaviors - going online and looking at Facebook - had a negative effect on him, so he decided not to engage in the behavior as much.
When you say, "If a person feels guilt, anger, envy etc. when others tell them their opinion, they will feel so regardless of the medium on which the message was delivered." - this may be true. But. Facebook (and twitter and other social networks) allow people to broadcast their opinions in a way that wasn't usual for most people before. Most people are more likely to be reserved or show some tact about expressing their opinions when they're engaged in conversation than they are when broadcasting online.
edit: sorry - Swizec didn't say he the author was blaming people. I got his comment mixed up with another one. In any case, I didn't think he was blaming social media insofar as he's taking responsibility by changing his behavior.
> We need to stop thinking of social networks as anything other than "social interaction".
We didn't evolve to handle social interactions that are not face-to-face. Medium really is the message and it alters the way those interactions go down greatly.
Like now, I probably wouldn't have interrupted you and start talking in a regular conversation but I have no problem with pulling one line out of your post and go at it online. And I would carefully explain what I mean instead of just dropping this link on you https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/fashion/let-your-smartpho...
Maybe I'm weird here because I've grown up as a geek and a nerd so most of my social skills were built online.
But that's exactly what I would do in a face-to-face conversation. When I call bullshit on somebody (or somebody does on me), we usually whip out a smartphone and find relevant links to see who's right.
And when the other person is taking too long to say something, they will often get interrupted. Conversations often go on tangents because somebody said something interesting.
Conversely, when somebody isn't being interested, people will just walk away mid conversation.
But as I said, maybe I and my friends are the weird ones here.
"If a person feels guilt, anger, envy etc. when others tell them their opinion, they will feel so regardless of the medium on which the message was delivered."
But social networks provide a sensory overload that was not there before. Go back some years to time without even sms, and you would get other peoples opinion practically only when you saw them.
I'm sure there are many personality types even today who dislike facebook like interaction, and that's fine. Certainly that is not an attitude that requires fixing.
If a person feels guilt, anger, envy etc. when others tell them their opinion, they will feel so regardless of the medium on which the message was delivered.
But it's much easier to blame social networks than fixing one's own attitude. (similar to how people would prefer to ban good television than teach their children about the difference between acted and real violence ... or the whole boobies thing)