Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Holiday cards vs. the never-ending barrage of social media

Teen girl reading unpleasant messages on mobile phone
Juan Algar/Getty Images
“How we spend our days is how we spend our lives.” — Annie Dillard

There was a time, not so long ago, when holiday cards were the means by which acquaintances updated us on their lives. Often featuring family photos with everyone dressed up, or perhaps casual with a seaside or mountainside backdrop, it was understood this was a “best shot” curated to feature everybody happily together.

Those holiday cards were eagerly opened, shared and even saved. Occasionally they might broach boundaries of good taste, perhaps featuring a photo of the sender’s new Lexus shining brightly as the Christmas star, or containing more pages than an IKEA assembly pack and listing the fifth grader’s achievements. But most of the time these cards conveyed the annual family update and welcome holiday cheer.


Now social media spreads such cheer throughout the year — holiday cards that do not stop. In the past, we were included on others’ card lists; now we are their “followers,” and they ours. Everyone spends lots of time exhibiting, checking likes, sending “stories,” updating statuses, etc. In other words, time alone with our phones.

Yet, in this constant barrage of “socialization” many feel isolated, even apathetic.

Playing to an audience is often fodder for personal discontent, despite large entourages. Besides, do we really care what our college roommate had for dinner last night when we haven’t seen her for 20 years? There is no real human connection through social media. We are not experiencing life first-hand, but rather in a fast-changing virtual reality.

It is a great irony of our age that, although we are more connected, we are less so. Look around at an airport, a waiting room, a grocery line. Most people are staring at their phones as if they’re magic mirrors, engaging only with the device in their hand.

And of course there’s this: What are you not doing while fixating on your screen?

Still, what’s the harm?

Plenty, according to social scientists, including increased depression and escalating suicide rates. Young people, whose social network is mostly electronic and whose validation depends upon it, are often taunted and preyed upon by those hiding behind online anonymity.

Teens’ unsophisticated willingness to buy into the glossy accounts of others’ fabulous lives causes increasingly low self-esteem, producing overriding dissatisfaction with their own lives. They compare their relatively tame — normal — lives with those of the more beautiful, more interesting, more sociable, which to their inexperienced eyes looks to be basically everyone else.

Increasing evidence of toxicity and damage is emerging, especially for our children. Johns Hopkins, Yale and others, have published articles on the detrimental effects of introducing electronic media too early, and the surgeon general has called for a warning label on social media platforms.

The surprising thing is that this is surprising. Cause and effect, and comparable to the one-child policy instituted in China in 1979 that resulted in too many baby boys (males, culturally preferred, females aborted.) Years later: not enough girls to marry the surplus of boys. Predictable. Facebook was launched in 2004, opening the door to social platforms, and we are just now starting to realize its detrimental effects?

In the great sweep of social media, illusion reigns with its inherent falseness, from the seemingly innocuous act of simple selection — not posting unflattering photos — to photo manipulation and digital Botox. Yet, have you ever, even once, heard anyone say, “Everyone loves her because she is so perfect”? It is never perfection we connect with: It is humanness.

Thanks to increasing access to this lightning-fast, but tinny, media, we now have young adults who would more likely leave their grandmother at the mall than their cell phone. Phones feel like their connection to the world. But are they? Listening to Grandma’s stories is likely a better, and certainly more rewarding, connection.

Life isn’t curated updates, not just “our story” playing out, but the stories we share, experiencing this time and this place together.

Rarely have we faced anything that so permeates the psyches of our lives, particularly those of the most vulnerable. Now, with brilliant AI breaking over the horizon, we tend to forget what is important. We may be able to find all the answers, but do we even know the questions?

“Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?” — Mary Oliver

Curate it and post it? Or live it?

Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."


Read More

A person interacts with an AI chatbot on a smartphone. The screen displays a conversation interface with the text "Hi, may I help you?" suggesting the use of an AI assistant app. A laptop is visible in the background, emphasizing a tech-savvy environment.

A 2026 study found AI beat elite debaters, until it was slowed to human speed. Why persuasion throughput matters and how to make chatbot tempo transparent.

Chong Kee Siong/Getty Images

Political Chatbots Should Not Be Allowed To Set the Pace

A political chatbot can answer before a citizen has finished reading its previous message. It can add statistics, historical examples, causal claims, and links at a rate no human campaign volunteer could match. That does not necessarily make its case wiser. It changes the contest by allowing one speaker to control the tempo.

A June 2026 preprint offers unusually direct evidence of this problem. Across four preregistered experiments involving 18,978 conversations from 6,923 people, frontier AI systems were more persuasive than laypeople, tournament winners, professional canvassers and elite competitive debaters. The human experts were not casual opponents: the study included world and continental champions, paid preparation, live practice and substantial performance incentives.

Keep ReadingShow less
Camera pointing at Donald Trump

U.S. President Donald Trump is seen in the electronic viewfinder of a television camera in the Oval Office at the White House on September 18, 2026, in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

How Democracy Dies Alongside a Constricted Press

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists.

We asked Malory Shaw, a Fall Fulcrum Fellow, to share what democracy means to her and how she sees its current health.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hasan Piker

Influencer and left-wing political commentator Hasan Piker is introduced during a campaign rally for Wisconsin Gubernatorial candidate Francesca Hong on Aug. 2, 2026, in Milwaukee.

(Joshua Lott/Getty Images/TNS)

While the world is on fire, the media are still obsessed with Israel

No one likes to think they’re being hysterical. And nothing makes hysterical people angrier than being described as such. So, let me offer my apologies in advance for what follows.

Jeremy Musighi, an independent researcher, recently released a study analyzing 14.7 million news articles published across 65 languages over the last decade. He found that, in 2024, news outlets published “more than twice as many stories about Israel as about all 48 countries of sub-Saharan Africa combined.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Person using mobile smartphone chatting with AI chatbot, conversation assistant, customer support

New research shows AI beats elite debaters in persuasion — not through better arguments, but by out-pacing human reading and reply speed.

MUNTHITA LAMLUE/Getty Images

Political Chatbots Should Not Be Allowed To Set the Pace

A political chatbot can answer before a citizen has finished reading its previous message. It can add statistics, historical examples, causal claims and links at a rate no human campaign volunteer could match. That does not necessarily make its case wiser. It changes the contest by allowing one speaker to control the tempo.

A June 2026 preprint offers unusually direct evidence of this problem. Across four preregistered experiments involving 18,978 conversations from 6,923 people, frontier AI systems were more persuasive than laypeople, tournament winners, professional canvassers and elite competitive debaters. The human experts were not casual opponents: the study included world and continental champions, paid preparation, live practice and substantial performance incentives.

Keep ReadingShow less