Many people are asking themselves how to keep their psychological house safe from digital intruders constantly breaking into their consciousness via online posts and tweets—practically everyone is connected with friends and family through Facebook, Twitter and other social media. It can be fun to post pictures, swap ideas and talk about what is happening in your life. And social networking sites can’t be beat in terms of speed in delivering news updates and providing unfiltered access to the musings of others near and far. Celebrities, those in leadership positions and average people alike all feel empowered by the potential breadth and effect of these instantaneous messages. 

However, it can be shocking to see people we are connected to post thoughts that are distasteful to our sensibilities. We can be left wondering just where we diverged from old friends, acquaintances, and family members. Postings regarding recent political events can sometimes leave us questioning if we ever really knew these people at all.

To Respond or Not Respond…

Should you block an individual who posts unsettling updates or even unfriend them? With many acquaintances the answer may be yes. The cost/benefit analysis of being privy to the political beliefs of someone you interned with twenty years ago should be fairly obvious. However, more often than not, we hold back. Why? Obviously, we’re concerned with alienating people we care about. Most of us want to be well thought of—even by people we don’t particularly like. Many people are fearful that breaking connections or digitally turning their backs may further strengthen the echo chamber of social networks that expose us only to those with similar tastes.

Research has long supported the effects of sequestering people with similar beliefs together for long periods of time. Repeated exposure to those with similar beliefs not only multiplies the strength of existing beliefs, but also pushes those beliefs to become more extreme and resistant to contrary evidence. At the extreme, these groups become radicalized. The polarizing effects of digitally and physically sequestering groups is well documented in our current political climate and helps explain our national divisiveness.

In order to overcome this polarization concerned citizens are repeatedly told that we must educate ourselves about the experiences of people very different from ourselves so that we might push beyond gridlock of finger pointing. We are told that our lack of education about the other side is what has gotten us into this mess. Therefore, many people believe that it is a duty to engage with—or endure disturbing posts. Strictly speaking, this might be true if the only interactions you have are online. However, all of us also have the option to limit or filter these upsetting intrusions and pursue other ways to educate ourselves and promote greater understanding across the political divide.

Making Choices to Protect Your Sanity

Living with constant unfiltered posts and tweets is like living in a crowded room with everyone you have ever met. People are constantly tapping you on the shoulder and sharing their latest random thoughts. You have the right to choose the amount of space you are willing to give these intrusions.

It’s crucial to regularly step outside the digital realm to interact with others face-to-face. These interactions have the potential to be more meaningful—when you are in the same room with the other person, you have a better chance of taking in their communications —both verbal and non-verbal—as well as experiencing their full humanity.

Many of us shrink from the intimacy of such face-to-face interactions because we’ve become accustomed to expressing our opinions in the relative safety of digital media. Most only recognize the sense of liberation bestowed by the immediate gratification of digital communications. It’s easy to overlook the costs of speaking our minds until we are on the receiving end of a digital flame that leaves us feeling enraged, rejected, or misunderstood.

Social and other digital media engages communications at an accelerated rate that often doesn’t allow for careful consideration and thought. This can result in overreactions to or turning away from the instigator of our distress. If we tell the other person off we may feel better for a few minutes, but have we really changed anything or just perpetuated the cycle of abuse? If we don’t respond we are left feeling impotent and ashamed of ourselves for our passivity.

No matter which option we choose we are left putting our psychological houses back in balance. Speaking your mind in person takes courage and persistence. If you respond appropriately and non-defensively while respectfully hearing the other person out, you will have a much better chance of keeping your balance in these trying times.