Are You Quitting Social Media for Lent or Literally Forever?

By Gary Cutlack on at

A press release for a company that sells something says 26 per cent of the people it asked are planning to giveĀ up social media for lent -- that's more people than are thinking about knocking booze and the relentless wanking on the head for 40 days. So does this mean social media can now be considered a failed experiment? Have we all literally had it with having to think of interesting things to say about politics? Is it just boring and pervasive and joyless now?

Obviously Facebook has its uses, as it's how I interact with my family without having to phone them, and I imagine that they live for the quarterly updates in which I post a curated photograph of my child and hint that my life's turned out better than that of the handful of school friends and former work colleagues I maintain a tactical relationship with on there. So I'll keep that account going, even though I've muted everyone so I don't have to see their opinions, ugly kids and shit sofas. The rest of it? Waste of time.

Twitter's literally a disaster. I'd quit it for good if I wasn't so worried about what I'd actually look at and do all day. It's all people racing to say the obvious things first. The future is David Schneider, saying something you were thinking but he typed up first, so if you say it you look like you're copying or, worse, agreeing with him. Where's the fun in that?

My Instagram is literally one photograph I took once. No one noticed so I think that can be closed without too much of a national crisis. Most days I refresh Twitter, reading what people I used to know think about things I'm not actually interested in, more out of habit than interest. It's all terrible, isn't it? They've constructed a prison for us and we don't even realise we're being held against our will by the advertising algorithms, and only 26 per cent of us are even thinking of escaping.