Finding Grace and Mercy on Social Media

Is Social Media Redeemable?

The following post has been sitting in various draft forms for about two years. I’ve wanted to write about social media because this issue is personal to me, but I’ve never known how best to approach it. I still don’t. I don’t have any wise words to say about this, just musings from a pastor and communications specialist who has worked in social media and seen the good and the bad.

I remember sitting in a nondescript hotel conference room in Omaha, Nebraska in 2007. I was there among other communications specialists in the Presbyterian Church (USA), learning about the importance of social media. We heard about this young social media platform, Facebook, growing by leaps and bounds. The message at that meeting in the fall of 2007 was that churches need to get on social media. This was where the community gathered and we needed to be a part of this. I would hear this message over and over again over the next few years. I would even preach that message myself in workshops I presented.

If you were a Millennial or Generation X, you heard the gospel of Facebook and you drank it in. Young Christians, both Progressive and Evangelical, wrote glowing blog posts on why your church needed to be on Facebook and how to use your Facebook page for the best. No one ever questioned Facebook. It was considered good. Period. End of story.

There was something about that time, between 2007 to maybe 2015, where it seemed like Facebook and Twitter couldn’t do anything wrong. They were the wave of the future and would change the world. It was an innocent time when I could see social media connecting people, allowing us to gather and converse and maybe, change the world. We were even excited about the so-called “digital natives” the kids who know nothing but growing up on the internet with smartphones and tablets.

Back then, I worked hard to connect the Presbytery where I worked and later the church where I served to Facebook, Twitter and whatever else was out there. I was a digital apostle, preaching the good news of social media.

The way we all talked about social media and Silicon Valley back then reminds me of that song “I.G.Y.” by Steely Dan frontman Donald Fagen, which sings movingly about a futuristic world of fast transport and “spandex jackets.” Of course, the song actually pokes fun at the future, because it is all its cracked up to be, which is sort of like our internet age.

These days, it seems like everyone hates social media sites like Facebook. The belief that Facebook somehow threw the 2016 US Presidential election to Donald Trump is believed by many, even though there is little evidence that this happened. But the damage had been done. If the public thought social media could do no wrong, now it was nothing better than a cancer that has ruined society. But people do believe its made us more lonely and polarized. And the joy of having all those digital native kids? Well, now we want to ban smartphones in schools because we see them as a hindrance to kids.

We are in the midst of what I like to call a “techlash” in that we are highly suspicious of any piece of tech. Social media, smartphones and artificial intelligence are all suspect and to blame for everything in our society. We’ve gone from thinking technology can bring down totalitarian regimes and bring about a better world to seeing tech as a threat to democracy and capitalism, maybe even supporting genocide. Does social media have any redeeming qualities? Has it made society smarter or dumber?

The social media that I was introduced to in that hotel room in Omaha isn’t the same social media. Twitter, Facebook and other social media used to be places of discovery, where you could post and share views from different perspectives. Social Media was a place of information, but because of changes in social media and changes in our own habits, it seems now to be a place of affirmation. You don’t hear different perspectives anymore; instead, it is a place where your views tend to be affirmed because you are surrounded by like-minded persons who produce memes that reflect your values.

The other danger of social media is how it can dehumanize. We can say things about the outgroup or someone who is different from us that we would never say in real life. What was supposed to connect us, now allows us to keep our distance and treat other people as inhuman.

What should we do with social media? What should we do with something like AI? What do we with technology overall? Does it still have any positive value in this day and age? Or do we walk away from it for good?

This issue is personal for me. I’ve been working with social media for nearly 20 years. And so I wonder, am I to blame for all of this? Do I have a part to play in all of this?

Whenever I read about the evils of social media and the internet as a whole, the talk almost always starts to focus on the algorithm, that mysterious feed that gives us more and more of what it thinks we want. It seems to give us more and more things that make us angrier. Commentators look to the algorithm as the source of what is wrong with social media and what is wrong with society. We are even starting to see it as a malevolent force seeking to bring pain and division, all the while enriching the owners of the various platforms.

I’ve come to agree with many who talk about the dangers of the algorithm. I do think social media companies can tend to profit from our outrage.

And yet. Whenever I think about social media, I am reminded of the refrain from the Taylor Swift song, “It’s me. Hi. I’m the problem, it’s me.”

You see, as much as social media companies might share in the blame for our sorry state, we can’t let ourselves off the hook. And yet, too often that’s what I see happen in so many articles that extol the evils of social media or its twin evil sister, the smartphone. Loren Richmond Jr. wrote in his Substack back in October about how his social media feeds became filled with ragebait about Christian Nationalism:

I’ve written previously about the rise of deconstructionist, anti-Evangelical voices on social media, largely fueled by hot takes and Evangelical-bashing rage-bait. I don’t know these creators personally, so maybe my assessment is wrong—or maybe I’m just jealous. But this trend represents something that’s become deeply frustrating about social media over the last ten years.

Since the collapse of Twitter, I’ve searched for a meaningful text-based platform. I tried Threads. I tried Bluesky. Neither hit the mark. Then I found Substack. At first, it seemed like a haven for thoughtful writing; a place where ideas could be explored with nuance and care, with Notes offering a way to share short reflections and interact meaningfully with other writers.

But that dream didn’t last long.

Once the presidential election cycle ramped up, my Substack feed began to look just like every other platform; reduced to hot takes on Christian Nationalism and Evangelical outrage bait. Maybe that’s just the algorithm feeding me what drives my engagement. But regardless, the pattern is clear: simplistic, reductionist, and intellectually lazy takes dominate the space—especially the Evangelical-bashing outrage bait.

I’ve encountered the same issue with Substack Notes. It was a quiet and peaceful place, and then everything changed. Joe Walsh, a former Tea Party Republican lawmaker turned Never Trumper, now Democrat, is a force on Notes and Twitter, always posting, which is always a rant about Trump, of course. And he is really popular. So have a lot of “resistance” Subtackers, and as Loren notes, those who talk about Christian Nationalism. Now, Trump and Christian Nationalism ARE threats. But there are people who are able to use social media to broadcast messages and peddle the latest outrage. They don’t foster dialogue or thought; they only foster anger. This isn’t simply the work of Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg; it’s also the work of influencers and their avid followers. Accounts like Libs of TikTok are popular because people want this stuff. We are as much the problem as the algorithm.

So, what do we do?

The temptation is to see social media and the internet as a whole as nothing but evil and walk away. This is the wrong approach. That doesn’t mean that walking away isn’t the best approach for some people. I know of some folk who felt social media was unhealthy for them, so they gave it up. That is a choice for some. But I don’t think that should be the choice for everyone. Just as Christians can’t leave the physical world, I don’t think we should just up and leave the digital world either. We need to find ways to live in this world. But that’s difficult because our culture is trained to think of social media not just as a nuisance, but as a great evil. In a recent podcast, John Green, the author and YouTuber, admitted he struggled with the question of social media as the new cigarettes. This isn’t the first time I’ve heard people reference social media in that way. I almost titled this post About Being a Drug Dealer is because my work in social media made me wonder if I’m viewed as the equivalent of a peddler of poison. Frankly, I don’t think this is a good way of looking at social media. I think the Church and Christians have a role in helping the internet be a better place by modeling Christ-like love.

Maybe that seems a little daft when you see the racist/sexist/homophobic/antisemitic drek on X and just the overall outrage everywhere on social media, but there is something to being a colony of heaven in the virtual world.

In the aftermath of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Episcopal priest Joseph Wolyniak noted something no one really considered about social media: its apocalyptic nature. When I mean apocalyptic, I don’t mean Four Horsemen, or the Antichrist or nuclear weapons. No, when I mean apocalyptic, I mean its original meaning: revealing. In the opening paragraph of his essay in the Living Church, he cites a passage from Luke 6:45 about how social media exposes the “evil treasure” in our hearts. Social media is less a cancer than a mirror, exposing what’s really in our hearts and if you look at people’s feeds, there is a lot of darkness.

Wolyniak (whom I interviewed on the Church and Main podcast)believes things boil down to seeing people with dignity. He writes:

Perhaps overwrought but no less relevant, the final question of the Baptismal Covenant grounds us in a solemn vow: “Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?” (p. 305) “I will,” we respond, “with God’s help.” That promise binds us to our neighbor, whether they are close friends or sworn adversaries. It reminds us that dignity is not conditional—it is not gained or lost by provocative speech, nor enhanced or diminished by platform or influence. It is inviolably given by God.

A bedrock commitment to inherit dignity must inform our political discourse. St. Thomas Aquinas accordingly situates veritas, truth, as a matter of justice: a “moral debt” required by “equity,” whereby “one man owes another a manifestation of the truth” (Summa Theologica II-II, Q.109, a.3, sc). If speech is a form of justice, then the way we speak about Kirk—or Donald Trump, or Gavin Newsom, or anyone else in public life—must be countenanced by that moral debt rooted in our interlocuter’s essential and undeniable worth. Zero-sum discourse, ad hominem insult, and secret or not-so-secret schadenfreude fall short of that justice. So too, idolization obscuring shortcomings: there is a reason the saints are vetted by a devil’s advocate en route to canonization.

Pope Francis, in Fratelli tutti, presciently warned: “Social aggression has found unparalleled room for expansion through computers and mobile devices.” (§44) He further bemoaned the “comfortable consumerist isolation” of online exchanges, so lacking “authentic interpersonal relationships,” noting how discursive hostility is fostered by algorithms designed to maximize outrage and monetize division (§45). Christians must awaken to the spiritual danger here: when anger becomes currency, the imago dei is all-too-conveniently obscured.

Probably never thought scrolling on Facebook could be tied to your baptismal covenant, did you?

But Wolyniak takes those vows seriously, seeing them seep into all aspects of life. How we speak (or post) matters to God. We shouldn’t be lured by the sirens that reduce online interactions to nothing more than consumerism. Wolyniak doesn’t lay the blame only at the feet of tech icons, but at the feet of people like you and me. When we see a meme or post that is designed to get a rise out of us, we have to stop and think first:

To pursue peace is not to avoid wading into difficult debates, but to speak in a way that refuses demeaning contempt.

Aquinas likewise reminds us prudence is the virtue by which we discern the right means to good ends. That prudence is needed now more than ever in our media engagement: watching, listening, posting. Before we like, comment, or share, we must ask: does this honor human dignity? Does it advance truth in love? Or does it simply add fuel to outrage that profits techno-feudalist companies while corroding our souls and body politic?

A few weeks ago, my husband and I drove down from Minneapolis to Rochester to see one of his younger cousins as the lead in the high school play, Cinderella. This had to be the most “political” version of that play that I’ve ever seen. The central focus is on how Cinderella was kind and how that kindness cascaded and made a difference in so many lives.

Maybe the solution to the sewage of social media isn’t government or trying to give it up. Maybe the solution is showing the grace and mercy of Jesus in ones and zeroes.

Agency is not simply walking away from social media, but it can be about responding a different way, in sabotaging the plans of the techlords by offering Christ-like love instead of fueling the rage machine.

Twenty years ago, we saw social media and their marketers/inventors as saviors. That was wrong, and we should repent. Christians should have known better. Social media is a fallen institution in a fallen world. But we have another chance to respond, not by demonizing this tool for communication, but by seeing ourselves as fallen and in need of mercy and grace and then asking for God’s help to be kind, to be little Christs on social media, because doing so might just change the world.