A very brief post on the conundrum of moral complicity and social media.

I have come to the conclusion that essentially all social media is inherently toxic. I feel a moral problem myself with posting to social media at all, because even if I do everything in my power to keep my content healthy, to the other side it simply serves as bait to assist social media companies in their program of harm. To me, there is really no moral way to participate in social media once you understand the algorithms.

The common counter argument that I get is based on ideas of free will – the line is “you aren’t in control of what those people choose to do, and it’s on them to choose to participate in the toxic stuff.” But to me that is very much akin to saying that it’s someone’s choice to go to a high crime area or to consume a harmful substance. I suppose the metaphor could just be, what if I put up an art gallery next door to a truly toxic business – say a tobacconist? Yet, I do think that many tobacconists are basically moral people. Or suppose a more morally murky business like a pharmacy. Are doctors immoral because they accept health insurance and sell drugs from morally questionable pharma companies? Harder question. When you look at things like doctors and lawyers (one of which I am myself) it suggests that there must be room for moral participation in an immoral system, and that I think is a good argument. So maybe I’m not entirely sure just yet.