Are you into (anti) social media?

Remember before the Internet, when you used to get gossip at the water cooler and the beauty shop, and you had to buy porn (you called it porno) at a “bookstore” that had its windows painted black?

Back when you cussed people out face to face, and had to go to the library to get questions answered, such as which states are found at the Four Corners? (Answer below)

Now? Gossip has its own websites, porn is plentiful and free, keyboard warriors issue violent threats from behind screen names, and all the world’s knowledge is at your fingertips. Like common sense, it is available but seldom used.

At some future date, I will deconstruct Twitter, but today I want to look at what I call (anti) social media, too often toxic and dehumanizing. Because of my career as a journalist, having an online “presence” was kind of necessary, and I retain it today, kind of like a bad habit. I enjoyed smoking (past tense) more than I do Facebook, the Great Time Sponge.

Posting on Facebook guarantees I will get plenty of feedback, both bouquets and bricks, but unlike my experience on Inquirer.com, most of the commentators use real names. I have long thought that allowing anonymous comments was a mistake and fought with the higher-ups at the newspaper all the time about this.

Their argument: It opens the door to free expression.

My argument: You allow anonymous posters to slander your staff and spread misinformation under the cloak of undeserved anonymity. Almost 250 years ago, a group of white men signed the Declaration of Independence, which was their own death warrant should the War of Independence have failed. None used a screen name. 

Just last week, Twitter, President Donald J. Trump’s favorite means of communication, bit him in the ass when he retweeted a comment in which a MAGA guy in a golf cart replied “white power” to a heckler. Context doesn’t matter and Trump was forced to delete the tweet, and not for the first time. An earlier tweet had something that looked like a Star of David in a questionable setting.

There are people who have nothing better to do than go back over years of posts by prominent people — politicians, athletes, entertainers — looking for off-color remarks or slurs. Lots of people have been embarrassed. The point is social media can get you in trouble, can make you sick. You should think about avoiding it.

Charles Barkley does.

The former Sixer great, future Hall of Famer and current broadcaster, talked about why he steers away from it on Michael Smerconish’s CNN show a couple of Saturdays ago.

“You can’t make everybody happy. No matter what you say, there’s some people out there who are angry, evil, mean, they’re never going to listen,” Barkley said.

“That’s one of the reasons I never never use social media. Everybody tries to play God, judge and jury. I’m never going to use social media for that aspect. Because it doesn’t matter what you say, some people they just, they got bad lives, so they’re always going to be negative.”

In a nutshell, that’s it — some people have bad lives and they use social media to settle scores. It’s like therapy for them, and a psychological kick in the gut for you.

Obscenity-filled arguments, called flaming, can go on for days, if not more. And no one has ever won an argument. Usually, all you “win” is the knowledge that most Americans can’t read, spell, or think.

The more time people spend on social media, the fewer healthy relationships they have in the real world, generally speaking. It can connect you with the world, but the world has cesspools as well as fountains.

The trip on the Internet can be hazardous to your mental health.

And the Four Corner states are Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico.