≡ Menu

In which I admit something embarrassing about Washington Post’s Facebook Social Reader

This is a little embarrassing, but I can’t be the only person who does this: Does the Washington Post’s Facebook Social Reader make you a little more… selective with what you click on than you’d otherwise be?

For those who don’t know what I’m talking about, WaPo’s Social Reader is basically the Washington Post on Facebook, with the catch that, unlike WashingtonPost.com, once you click on something, your friends are notified as to what you’re reading.

And we’re back.

I like the reader in terms of layout and just what it is, but I find myself thinking things like I don’t want anyone to know I read that and Oh, this will make me look cultured, like I’ve done some real book learnin’. Of course, there are items I just don’t care if people see that I read, like science, pop culture or sports. I just can’t help but think what people might infer from seeing, for instance, that I’ve read five posts about Barack Obama’s presidency or eight in a row about the 2012 Republican presidential field (note: not actual figures).

I can’t be the only person affected in this way.

Has anyone seriously considered the implications of “social reading” and the potential chilling effect it could have? This is not a rhetorical question, by the way, so if you have some insight or a link or something, please let me know in the comments.

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Morgan Palmer

    Completely agree.  That’s why I don’t use Spotify.  I listen to too much music from the 70s and 80s.

  • Protip: Use your wife’s account ;)