Author Topic: Facebook SS in the NY Times  (Read 3349 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TeamBhakta

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2559
Facebook SS in the NY Times
« on: May 12, 2013, 12:05:20 PM »
BG: The writer, Joyce, had a falling out with a friend. Her complaint is about seeing the ex-friend's son's wedding photos on FB. Joyce wrote an article that was basically vaguebooking about "You hurt my feelings not inviting me, but I can still see your pictures." I'm under the impression many people avoid inviting Joyce to events, but maybe that's just me

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/booming/in-your-face-book-heres-the-party-you-werent-invited-to.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=1&
« Last Edit: May 12, 2013, 12:07:38 PM by TeamBhakta »

kherbert05

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10277
    • Trees downed in my yard by Ike and the clean up
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2013, 12:52:26 PM »
BG: The writer, Joyce, had a falling out with a friend. Her complaint is about seeing the ex-friend's son's wedding photos on FB. Joyce wrote an article that was basically vaguebooking about "You hurt my feelings not inviting me, but I can still see your pictures." I'm under the impression many people avoid inviting Joyce to events, but maybe that's just me

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/booming/in-your-face-book-heres-the-party-you-werent-invited-to.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=1&
I have pictures of my sister's wedding and of my family's 4th of July party hanging in my home. You weren't invited and are coming over to visit. Does etiquette require  I remove them for your visit. Of course not.

If she doesn't want to see the pictures, she should have the friend blocked. I suspect she does want to see the pictures, so she can make catty remarks. She wanted to attend the wedding not to wish the young couple well, but to have more ammo for her remarks. She needs to get over herself and her former friend needs to catch a clue and block the woman.
Don't Teach Them For Your Past. Teach Them For Their Future

JenJay

  • I'm a nonconformist who doesn't conform to the prevailing standards of nonconformity.
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5947
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2013, 12:56:18 PM »
She starts out with "A friend’s son got married a while back, and because of an unfortunate rift with my friend, I was not invited. I did, however, have the pleasure of looking at the Facebook pictures and seeing how old my friend had become. " I'm going to go ahead and guess that the Groom didn't invite her because he wanted his wedding to be a pleasant event for his mom. Sheesh!

Luci

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5994
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2013, 02:29:18 PM »
There is a handy little button that says something like 'block feed'. It works quite well, and after a bit of time, I can start reading the friend's feed again. Which reminds me, I must go back and reinstate a friend's feed now that her fundraiser is over.

Usually, only about 3 pictures show up on the Home page, and one has to click on them to get more, then click more for every subsequent photo. She didn't have to do that. It is also pretty easy to just scroll past stuff you don't want to see. She already admitted that she knows why she wasn't invited to the wedding.

She doesn't even have to be on Facebook to begin with, or look at it.

Whole rant is entirely her problem.


TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 30506
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2013, 03:31:04 PM »
I didn't think she was such a Special Snowflake.

I think she was just pointing out one of the pitfalls of Facebook. That Facebook—and the posting of pics, updates, etc.—makes it harder to maintain the polite illusions/deceptions that etiquette demands.

Since the supposed true intent of inviting anybody anywhere is to spend time with them, Miss Manners has deemed that the only *acceptable* reason to give for declining is "previous engagement." And that "it's a small wedding" is the only non-hurtful reason to give for why someone wasn't invited. And that posting stuff on Facebook makes it harder to maintain those little white lies.

That's all.

I didn't get from it the idea that she's upset about not being invited to the wedding (and in fact, it seems that she sort of enjoyed all the opportunities to be privately or internally catty--something Miss Manners actually endorses).

It's just that this incident in her own life got her musing about the etiquette risks that one runs w/ Facebook. Risks we here at EHell have ALSO commented on and (just like her!) urged people to be cautious about.

kherbert05

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10277
    • Trees downed in my yard by Ike and the clean up
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2013, 03:59:30 PM »
I didn't think she was such a Special Snowflake.

I think she was just pointing out one of the pitfalls of Facebook. That Facebook—and the posting of pics, updates, etc.—makes it harder to maintain the polite illusions/deceptions that etiquette demands.

Since the supposed true intent of inviting anybody anywhere is to spend time with them, Miss Manners has deemed that the only *acceptable* reason to give for declining is "previous engagement." And that "it's a small wedding" is the only non-hurtful reason to give for why someone wasn't invited. And that posting stuff on Facebook makes it harder to maintain those little white lies.

That's all.

I didn't get from it the idea that she's upset about not being invited to the wedding (and in fact, it seems that she sort of enjoyed all the opportunities to be privately or internally catty--something Miss Manners actually endorses).

It's just that this incident in her own life got her musing about the etiquette risks that one runs w/ Facebook. Risks we here at EHell have ALSO commented on and (just like her!) urged people to be cautious about.

Once she publishes the catty remarks in the NYTimes they are no longer private or internal. It isn't her feelings so much that make her an SS - it is putting the whole thing on a public form like The NY Times.


Dozens of relatives are posting Mother Day pictures at events I wasn't invited to. My feelings are hurt. I just see FB the same as my house. I have pictures up not everyone who enters was invited to the events - that doesn't make me a bad person.



Don't Teach Them For Your Past. Teach Them For Their Future

Hmmmmm

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6359
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2013, 05:15:26 PM »
I agree with part of her post, that some people throw any sense of discretion to the wind and don't think about what they are posting. Would you call an old friend up and say "Hey, I came to town last week and had dinner with Tim and Nancy but didnt' invite you." No, most people wouldn't but many people hear that message every day.

But her post starts off on a very sour note remarking about seeing how old her ex-friend now looks and carrying on wondering about the cost of the wedding and who paid. You understand why it is an ex-friend.

*inviteseller

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1821
  • I am Queen Mommy
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2013, 08:20:58 PM »
Well, guess I will not post the pictures I took of the great place we went for dinner tonight (stone castle with medieval theme) because only 2 other people on my friends list were there.  Would hate to be called out for not inviting the other 117 !  This woman just publicly humiliated herself, and she doesn't even see it..she honestly thinks she is so special that no one should be allowed to have lives that don't include her.   I never take anyone else's posts (and 90% on my list are family members ) about their events to heart or feel upset I am not included in every little thing that happens in their lives. 

MrTango

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2310
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2013, 09:59:52 PM »
So, what this woman is essentially saying is "You shouldn't be allowed to post photos of an event on Facebook unless everyone who might be able to see them was invited to the event."

First of all: "No."

Second: If someone on my FB friend list complained that they weren't invited to an event and said that they were offended at seeing photos of of the event on my FB page, I would be very quick to correct the situation.  They would no longer be able to see the photos because I would unfriend and block them.

Jones

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2013, 10:16:21 PM »
Tonight I posted a picture of me folding laundry with my son in a backpack carrier, looking at a picture book. If anyone wants to help me fold laundry tonight, let me know; I'll share the pic with you and consider that your invitation.... >:D

Twik

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 28380
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2013, 10:20:10 AM »
So, what this woman is essentially saying is "You shouldn't be allowed to post photos of an event on Facebook unless everyone who might be able to see them was invited to the event."

First of all: "No."

Second: If someone on my FB friend list complained that they weren't invited to an event and said that they were offended at seeing photos of of the event on my FB page, I would be very quick to correct the situation.  They would no longer be able to see the photos because I would unfriend and block them.

I agree.

While Toots is right in saying that FB sort of "outs" many of our little white lies, that is the problem of using Facebook. You can't say, "I want to sign up for a service to see about everything my friends are doing ... wait a sec, they shouldn't be telling me about *that*! I'm so deeply hurt!"

The writer was not talking about an event to which she should have, by rights, been invited (say, she was the only one of a small group of friends not invited on an outing which she would have enjoyed). She was complaining about not being invited to the wedding of someone whose mother she apparently despises. There is no reason really to maintain a "white lie" here - she had no specific reason to expect an invitation, and should not be offended that she was not given one. If she knows they are married, it should sink in that there was a wedding to which she was not invited. Does she expect that the HC will continue the fiction around her that they are still cohabiting, and explain to her those rings on the woman's right hand are just dinner rings?

MrTango has the right approach - if your "friend" cannot bear to see or hear of events to which s/he was not invited, she should be spared any possible further pain by being cut off (in the Facebook sense, at least).
My cousin's memoir of love and loneliness while raising a child with multiple disabilities will be out on Amazon soon! Know the Night, by Maria Mutch, has been called "full of hope, light, and companionship for surviving the small hours of the night."

Sterling

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2993
    • Oh Stupid Me- Blogs about Things That Drive Me Crazy
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #11 on: May 14, 2013, 02:02:21 PM »
Also while I keep most things private and have a list of people restricted that I don't want to share everything with there have been times I have made certain pics or posts public.

I posted the first picture of my baby publicly from the hospital.  Does that mean I am suppose to invite everyone on Earth to the hospital for a visit since I did invite some people.
93 93/93

Charliebug

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 125
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2013, 02:05:09 AM »
THe LW's catty remarks and sour grapes aside, I did not get the impression that the LW was saying that just because you are on FB and have FB friends that there is an expectation that EVERYONE on your list be invited to every event.

I think she was commiserating with those who are in a 'circle' of friends or family, who would have a reasonable expectation of an invite, but were not included in the festivities for reasons unknown to that person and are facing the reality of being excluded via pictures on FB.

As the poster of these pics, jf you know that you told a white lie to spare someone's feelings about not getting together or whatnot, why would you then post pictures knowing that person can see that you lied and chance hurting their feelings? It doesn't mean you can't post your pictures, it simply means take a moment to change your settings or just keep it on email. I guess what it comes down to is think before you act.




TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 30506
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2013, 10:36:38 AM »
So, what this woman is essentially saying is "You shouldn't be allowed to post photos of an event on Facebook unless everyone who might be able to see them was invited to the event."


No, she's saying, "you should be careful about posting photos on Facebook because there's a potential to hurt people feelings because they'll feel left out."

THe LW's catty remarks and sour grapes aside, I did not get the impression that the LW was saying that just because you are on FB and have FB friends that there is an expectation that EVERYONE on your list be invited to every event.

I think she was commiserating with those who are in a 'circle' of friends or family, who would have a reasonable expectation of an invite, but were not included in the festivities for reasons unknown to that person and are facing the reality of being excluded via pictures on FB.

As the poster of these pics, jf you know that you told a white lie to spare someone's feelings about not getting together or whatnot, why would you then post pictures knowing that person can see that you lied and chance hurting their feelings? It doesn't mean you can't post your pictures, it simply means take a moment to change your settings or just keep it on email. I guess what it comes down to is think before you act.


I agree with this.

MamaMootz

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2981
  • I'm a lumberjack and I'm O.K....
Re: Facebook SS in the NY Times
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2013, 02:32:18 PM »
So, what this woman is essentially saying is "You shouldn't be allowed to post photos of an event on Facebook unless everyone who might be able to see them was invited to the event."


No, she's saying, "you should be careful about posting photos on Facebook because there's a potential to hurt people feelings because they'll feel left out."

THe LW's catty remarks and sour grapes aside, I did not get the impression that the LW was saying that just because you are on FB and have FB friends that there is an expectation that EVERYONE on your list be invited to every event.

I think she was commiserating with those who are in a 'circle' of friends or family, who would have a reasonable expectation of an invite, but were not included in the festivities for reasons unknown to that person and are facing the reality of being excluded via pictures on FB.

As the poster of these pics, jf you know that you told a white lie to spare someone's feelings about not getting together or whatnot, why would you then post pictures knowing that person can see that you lied and chance hurting their feelings? It doesn't mean you can't post your pictures, it simply means take a moment to change your settings or just keep it on email. I guess what it comes down to is think before you act.


I agree with this.

POD to Toots and Charliebug - this, exactly. You can actually edit who sees what you post - I do this all the time when I'm posting a picture that may not be approrpriate for my niece to view.
"I like pie" - DD's Patented Bean Dip Maneuver