Social networks have two primary purposes, one is to make the creators profits, and the second is for communication. While these are social media’s primary purposes, what if there was an additional factor beyond its purposes? One such factor I argue is the effects on a person’s brain. Facebook is a widely used social media site that affects many people. I assert that Facebook is beneficial to the brain because its simplicity helps my generation in so many ways. One of those ways is how we experience emotion.  In this essay, I argue that Facebook influences how we experience emotions. I will discuss how the emotion section of the brain is impacted; why the emotions section should not be affected; and also why Facebook should still be utilized.

One Social Network I can say a majority of the population is guilty of using, is Facebook. Facebook is social network that makes a lot of money from allowing people from all over the world to use it for their needs. Many people may use Facebook for personal uses such as, getting into contact with family members they haven’t seen for a while and/or business reasons to be able to be more interactive with work. It has a lot of beneficial features that separates it from other social networks. For example with Facebook you can make group chats,  business meetings, organize a social gathering, gather information, and even meet new people with its built in features. Choosing to use social networks is a personal decision, because not everyone is the same. One person could thrive off the resources provided by Facebook, such as; Messenger, Group chats, and even video calls. A person could not understand the use of Facebook, but they can also go to the extreme and ruin their own lives. Asides from communication and networking, a lot of people get drawn into using Facebook because they see others (Friends, and family) using it. There are a lot of websites and sources available that will tell you why Facebook is the best option currently.

Social Networking sites like Instagram and Snapchat can affect a person in different ways because each one has their own features. Instagram draws in their audience by portraying pictures and direct messages. Snapchat does the same as Instagram but, focuses on short videos that disappear after Twenty-four hours. Facebook is one of the best social networking sites because; it combines both pictures and videos and also has its own source of communication which is the Facebook Messenger. Out of the three social networks, Facebook has the potential to impact a person’s emotions the most. The way Facebook is calibrated; it allows one person’s emotions to be affected. According to LexisNexis Academic, Vindu Goel says that, “The six new emoji depict various expressions, from an open mouth to express surprise to a scowling red face for anger. The other four emotions are love, laughter, sadness and a supportive cheer”Pg2. These new Facebook emoji’s allows the Audience to articulate their thoughts further. For example, Facebook has the “News Feed” which displays every person’s thoughts out to the world based on their privacy settings. This contributes to the impact on a person’s emotions, because whatever is posted online always has an effect on its audience. For example, if a person posted a graduation picture for everyone to see, his or her goal is to entice the audience and get a positive reaction. When you think of an impact, does it cross your mind on how it can affect your brain? John Medina mentioned in the Wiring chapter of Brain Rules that, “When you learn something, the wiring in your brain changes”86. This validates my point because just seeing a post online can restructure your brain. According to the Academic Search complete, Aviva Rutkin mentioned that, “Digital emotions proved somewhat contagious, too. People were more likely to use positive words in Facebook posts [as if they had been exposed to fewer negative posts throughout the week]” (Rutkin 4). This quote shows that depending on how you use Facebook, the outcome will match your overall emotions. In interview 1, Nenson Cover (Age N/A, Electrician, Date: 11/29/2015) believed that, “When you use a social network like Facebook, you have to keep in mind that whatever you post will affect you and others online. So, if you stay away from negativity it will stay away from you, and that is why I agree that Facebook can affect a person positively.”

Facebook can affect a person’s emotion positively to a great extent, but it still has its downsides that should be taken into high consideration. The emotions should not be affected while indulging on the benefits of social network uses. In the second interview, Shamani Patton (Age 18, Student, Date: 11/25/15) agreed that, Facebook does affect a person emotions negatively because, “If we are sitting behind a computer screen, we are not actually comforting the person. Also, we are in competition with people on social media that we are so engulfed in making our life look perfect to on social media, that instead of actually showing emotion to others.” A lot of people may agree with this counter claim simply because, it points out that when a person’s emotions is affected negatively, one of the best ways of comfort comes from the other person physically. Also, the quote points out other negative emotions besides sadness do play a role such as, envy. When people are in constant debate about appearances or even the judgement of another human, the situation does not always play out well. Being the center of attention on social media may not always be a good thing. One person may argue that, not having a Facebook account makes their life much more peaceful due to no conflict. Another person may also not include themselves with Facebook because it is an emotional addiction. Both points can be agreed with, because college students tend to check Facebook on their phones constantly throughout the day but they do not realize how much emotional stress it can have on the brain.        All these negative perspectives could be agreed upon and be proven through experiment, but they do not supply a reason why Facebook shouldn’t still be used proudly. Shamani Patton proved a valid point in her statement when she said, you can’t comfort a person through a computer screen, but most of the time a person doesn’t need to be comforted because of what happened to them on social media. Although I agree with Shamani Patton, I believe that Facebook is harmless. Facebook is not to blame for any actions, but the person on the opposite end is. It is all about how you use Facebook. Facebook does affect a person positively, because they are the ones in control of Facebook and themselves. Some of its uses are for gain, entertainment, and business, which all have positivity in common. All negative aspects of Facebook could be avoided if you choose to use its resources wisely.

Social Networks may not all have the same factors, but mostly have similar purposes. Facebook is one social network that has an impact on its audience’s minds compared to other social networks. The emotional section of the brain was affected more positively than negatively, due to individuals’ way of using Facebook. Even though a lot of negatives did occur on Facebook, it should still be used. As time goes by, social networks, technology, and the human mind will continue to advance. With new advancements and new solutions, it will be developed to keep social networks balanced. Our future relies on new advances due to the demands of growth of technology. Where will the further development of Facebook lead individuals? Will it continue affecting the way humans deal with situations? Will this still lead to the emotions being affected? We won’t know until we keep experimenting for answers. The positives will be shown but, there will always be a negative remark for the way Facebook is being used. As for If Facebook really affects the brain, the answer is still under construction.

Work Cited

• Cover, Nenson. Personal Interview. 11 Nov 2015
• Patton, Shamani. Personal Interview. 11 Nov 2015
• Rutkin, Aviva. “Even online, emotions can be contagious.” EE: New Scientist. Vol. 222 Issue 2975, p22-22. Academic Search Complete. Web. 28 Jun. 2014.
• The New York Times, July 1, 2014 Tuesday Late Edition – Final. Pg. D1, 1579 words, JARON LANIER, LENGTH: 874 words, LexisNexis