The arrival of The Social Network, the quasi-libelous pseudo-biopic of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has fueled quite a bit of discussion over the limits and potential of social media in general, as well as what they may already be doing to us. I have read several of the better instances of such reflections, and concluded that they tend to be woven of authorial narcissism. Reflecting either wariness of potential control by invisible forces of which we are ignorant or openness to possibility without proper caution, these reflections, like Fincher's film, tell us far more about those who present them to us than they do both the limitation and potential of the media themselves.
As a United Methodist, one great advantage I recognized fairly early is the way social media facilitate connection. On the most mundane level, Facebook allows individuals to create a network of individuals with whom they can choose to interact, choosing the limits of that interaction, opening themselves more or less to the larger world by choice. While it does have limitations and the potential for hazard (particularly for children), this is no less true than any other way of socializing. The oft-repeated warnings that the communities created by the various networks of "friends" on Facebook can lead to the false impression of a deepening understanding; that any virtual interaction creates a set of expectations and assumptions that cannot be sustained by real-world experience; that transferring our understanding of friendship to this new form of interaction falsifies both our original ideas concerning friendship as well as the nature of our interactions on digital platforms are all important to bear in mind. They should not deter us, however, from realizing that the various networks are our creations.
Having been on Facebook for about two years now, I have seen the potential of these intentional communities of choice in any number of ways. Contrary to the dire warning presented by Zadie Smith at the close of her essay "Generation Why?" - "The Social Network is not a cruel portrait of any particular real-world person called “Mark Zuckerberg.” It’s a cruel portrait of us: 500 million sentient people entrapped in the recent careless thoughts of a Harvard sophomore." - is not borne out by experience. As a platform providing opportunities for interaction, it offers users the ability to create their own ways of presenting themselves; most Facebook users are familiar with the plethora of "quizzes" ("What's color reflects your personality?"; "Who were you in a past life?") that were created, by and large, by teenage girls. As Facebook is not only a tool for users, but also a tool for its investors to make money, most users are aware that the amount of information shared on Facebook should always be considered with at least one eye jaundicedly gazing at the potential for exploitation.
All the same, we have before us a tool that should be used to the fullest extent to connect us. As United Methodists, always talking about "connectionalism", we have in Facebook in particular an example of what connectionalism could really look like. We have a tool that can be used to get the Word out. We have a tool to create communities for mission work, for Bible study, even for creating worship communities on-line.
Sad to say, our usual ways of thinking and acting as "church", locally and in the connection, make us wary of tools that have the potential to grow outside the control of the authority of the denomination. The Call to Action Commission final report (.pdf), conceived in fear, seeking for solutions in methods already abandoned by the business community, utilizing a vocabulary that does not reflect our Wesleyan heritage, our tradition of profound theological reflection, or the reality that "vitality" is reflected in connection itself as much as any set of criteria open to direct statistical analysis, fails at precisely this point. Even more than its desire to focus intention on undefined "vital congregations", it ignores the social and cultural context in which we live, and how we interact.
There is potential for re-envisioning church, as well as gathering information about church, that is simply not on the radar of the authors of Call to Action - the way we are already creating new ways of being together with the digital tools we all have in our homes.