One thing that always strikes me when I look at old (1950’s and earlier) photos is how well dressed everybody is. All the women in skirts; all the men in suits. Even in the warehouses, or on the ranch, it was still a button-down shirt and wool slacks. Nobody anywhere walked around in long underwear, pajamas, ripped clothes, etc. Those things were clearly for at-home, out of the public eye. The culture had a sense that we have a public face and a private face, and they were separate, and that’s ok. It isn’t “being inauthentic” to have to dress decently in public, and then be frumpy at home. But something changed.
Now, of course, you can see anything and everything at the local big box store. And if you say something, you’re “being judgmental” and “not accepting people for who they really are.” Long underwear in public is your identity? Pajamas in the store is your personality?
My take is that it started in the 1970’s with the emphasis on being “authentic” and “true to yourself”. We were going to sit in a circle, with a group of strangers, and they would poke and pry us emotionally until we opened up about our deepest secrets, and then everyone would spill all their personal beans, and we’d cry and sing kum-ba-ya and smoke some leafy stuff and break free of those social restraints that tell us to behave certain ways in public. From there came the idea that we should never worry about presentation in public, then vulgar language in public, then to dressing however we feel is “truly me”, then to the pajama party in aisle 5.
And you can call me a fuddy duddy or grumpy old man, but I don’t, honestly, want to see that much of you, or always know that much, or have to look at that much. Some things are ok to keep private. If you’re my friend, my lover, the rules are different. If you’re a stranger, some decorum is good.
But this is our culture, where we are told that any self-censoring is oppression and any public face is a form of lying.
Then came the internet.
Now everyone had the tools to “authentically” share their innermost everything with everyone. Shameless self-revelation met free public broadcasting, and the results have not always been pretty.
On the one hand are people who are isolated and bullied being able to find community that’s safe and affirming.
On the other hand is more bullying and attacking and some of darkest thoughts you never thought people could have.
What can work for good can work for evil.
I remember Facebook as a college pastor in the mid 2000’s. It was a way to catch up with your high school friends and get pictures of the grandkids, then it became a place for angry rants and lies generated by Russian hackers to spread hate and division.
The same has become true of all the other forums. 4Chan, said to be a bastion of free speech, has become the favorite of school shooters and terrorists to find other people with creepy, violent fantasies and plans to get validation. That crazy guy who used to rant at the hardware store used to just get the small town telling him to chill. Then he would go back to the basement, alone, to sit with his dark plans by himself. Now he has a computer in his basement, and can share with everyone his plans, and find people all around the globe to validate them and help him find the best way to commit a mass murder.
Some things, I will argue, should not get a public audience.
If you can’t say it in a group of people, to their faces, and have to sit and listen to their reactions, you maybe shouldn’t say it at all. Unless, again, you’re the kid being bullied and you’re looking for support, or the person with a unique disease and you need to find support with others for whom the bloody details are not Too Much Information but part of a constructive conversation.
It’s a good rule to keep: don’t say it online if you wouldn’t say it in person.
But when it’s me behind a keyboard, I don’t have to fear the response. I might get it in the comments, but it’s not the same. Easier to blow off hateful comments than see a reaction to my face. At least in the 1970’s “encounter group” I couldn’t bash everyone there and not have some kickback. I could be authentic, spill TMI, but I still had some accountability.
I have to admit that when I first got on Facebook in the mid 2000’s, it was kinda fun. I found old friends from high school and college and camp. I caught up with people I probably wouldn’t see in person because of distance. I enjoyed the debates about theology, Bible, politics. I even used to like to stir the pot, get things going. Now, I’ve pulled back. The longer it goes, the less I post, and the less I reveal, and the less I say, because I’m no longer feeling that it builds up. It just wears me out. It’s becoming less is more.
This all becomes an issue for us churches, too, as we try to figure out how to promote what we do on social media, while also dealing with the creeps and trolls and haters who want to bring you down. How do you stay positive in an ocean of negativity? How much do you talk about? What do you show?
As a general rule, I don’t post on church sites a lot of pictures of people. I never know how much people want to be posted. And when I do, the faces are often small or hard to see. I try hard to always project a good image, and keep church business off line. I don’t want to see how the sausage is made at my restaurant, nor do people want to see it at church. It’s the nature of public relations that you have to never show weakness, always make everyone think everything’s great – even when it isn’t. Curating an image and brand is a bit of a game in lying by omission. But if I was truly honest, nobody would ever come. They’d go to the place where everything looks perfect.
Martin Luther has a great line about bearing false witness in the small catechism:
You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.
What does this mean? We should fear and love God so that we do not tell lies about our neighbor, betray him, slander him, or hurt his reputation, but defend him, speak well of him, and explain everything in the kindest way.
We don’t do enough, in my opinion, of remembering the second parts of these explanations – the proactive parts. Christian ethics gets reduced to a list of don’ts, when in fact discipleship is supposed to be active – taking up your cross and following. Yes, don’t lie on the stand, don’t slander people, don’t bully and demean. But that’s passive. Not enough. We should be actively speaking positively of others, building them up, and defending their reputations.
I wish this was how everyone was online. But, alas, that’s for Magical Golden Unicorn Land. More and more it’s the opposite, the airing of too much private information, personal thoughts, and negativity about others. I never thought the Small Catechism would be so relevant. When you see bullying, slander, hate – call it out – then respond by building people up. When you have thoughts that aren’t terribly upbuilding of people, don’t put them online. Don’t participate in the pile-on.
Put on a good public face for Jesus and the church. When you speak up for justice, and build up those in need, and refuse to participate in evil, you do the work of the Gospel.
Peace,
Pastor Lars,