In such scenarios giving voice to an issue as part of the crowd makes an individual feel as though they have taken part in the issue itself. This happens because when someone fails to offer support in such a situation they fell they have betrayed their comrades in power. Such isolation is not what social networks are for since they unite people with others of the same mentality. Hence the prospects of being the odd one out is something many users do not want invading their conscience. When someone becomes a member of the social media pack one’s behavior then mimics the others who follow this popular culture. As a result, it suppresses one true identity as they pretend they are happier with the consensus. This harmony is what users seek from their social media acquaintances as it smoothen their relationships with people they will never meet in their lives. Yet their manners continue to impersonate these individuals who impress …show more content…
In real sense they are only hindering the true solutions needed to resolve these issues. The connectivity social media makes possible is instrumental is getting a message across with global implications. It does not mean social media is the right tool to use especially when playing devil’s advocate with an issue one has never experienced. An individual cannot profess to understand someone’s problems without knowing how they affect this person, therefore offering them a bias solution may not work in their situation. A false perception becomes created when the mass takes arms against an issue, which renders the protests unfounded especially when the majority has no clues whatsoever about the problem. Therefore, inflicting the general opinion of the mass to a problem is not helping, but imposing the group’s view on other. This makes it a tyrannical practice that decimates social issues since it relies on pressure rather than long term solutions. Then again the interest the issues generate dissipates quickly as social networks are unpredictable in their