In graduate school in the 2000s, I was a huge advocate for social media.
I can still recall being at parties, passionately explaining why everyone should join Twitter. Back then, there were dozens of competing networks, such as Jaiku, Pownce, and Friendster. Twitter seemed like the best option. It was simple, open, and felt revolutionary.
Fast forward a couple of decades, and things feel very different. Today, when I think about social media, especially platforms like Twitter (now X) and Facebook, it’s hard not to feel disillusioned. So how did we get here, and is there a better, more ethical “Middle Way”?
Here’s what I’ve seen, and what gives me hope.
When Social Media Felt Full of Possibility
One of my early experiences with social media happened while I was working at Wisconsin Public Media (WPR). I noticed that WPR didn’t have any social media presence. I wasn’t in marketing, but it seemed obvious to me: we needed to be part of this new frontier. So I reserved the handle @wpr on Twitter. It wasn’t an official job duty. It just felt like the right thing to do.
I was excited about these new tools. Once, I even drove from Madison to Chicago to attend a “Social Media Breakfast,” a meetup for people who wanted to talk about how social networks were changing the world. After we moved to Minneapolis, I kept attending similar events. At first, these meetups were all about innovation, creativity, and connection.
But gradually, the focus shifted. More and more, it became less about building community and more about marketing. The goals were “leveraging audiences” and “maximizing engagement.” And somewhere along the way, the magic faded.
The Fall of Open Platforms
Twitter was once open. People built their own apps to interact with it. Developers experimented freely. It was a vibrant, living system.
But as it grew, Twitter became more restrictive. Now, you can’t even view tweets unless you’re logged in. It’s no longer a public conversation. It’s a locked-down platform chasing profits.
Other new platforms like Bluesky (also founded by Jack Dorsey) seem friendlier and more open. But based on history, it’s hard not to wonder: if Bluesky becomes massively popular, won’t it eventually follow the same path?
Growth, power, profit. It’s a predictable cycle.
Is Mastodon the Ethical Choice?
When I think about what I want from a social network today, it’s not more marketing, more anger, or more algorithm-driven addiction. It’s meaningful connection. Integrity. Community.
That’s why Mastodon, and other social networks in the Fediverse, feel like the most ethical options right now.
Mastodon isn’t controlled by a single corporation. It’s decentralized, which means it’s more like email than Facebook. Around 2018, I was hosting my own Mastodon server on matthewtift.com, but in 2020 I moved my account to mastodon.social because it’s easier — and I can always change my mind in the future.
I haven’t deleted all of my other social media accounts, but Mastodon is the only network I mention on matthewtift.com and the only one I have installed on my phone. It feels aligned with values I try to live by, especially from the yogic yamas and niyamas.
For example, Mastodon supports ahimsa, the principle of non-harming. When I use Mastodon, I don’t feel like I’m participating in an ecosystem designed to inflame anger, spread misinformation, or harm mental health. My experience is quieter, slower, and less aggressive. That feels like a form of kindness, both to myself and to others.
It also connects with satya, or truthfulness. Mastodon doesn’t flood me with half-truths boosted by algorithms chasing outrage. You can fill your feed with what matters most to you, not what a corporation thinks you should see. Lots of people show up as themselves, not as brands or outrage machines.
And it embodies santosha, the practice of contentment. There’s no need to scramble for followers or let algorithms and ads pull our attention elsewhere. Posts arrive in simple chronological order. It’s easier to engage just for the joy of connection.
In other words, no one is trying to manipulate me, get me addicted, or monetize my attention. That, to me, feels almost subversive.
When I use Mastodon, it feels like the right thing to do. It’s a bit like the feeling I get when I turn off the lights as I leave a room, or when I recycle my paper and cans. I probably won’t save the planet by doing those things alone, but they feel right. Choosing an ethical social platform feels good, in my mind and my body.
Finding the Middle Way
In Buddhism, the Middle Way refers to the path between self-indulgence and self-denial. It’s about finding balance and living with compassion, wisdom, and awareness.
That idea resonates in Unitarian Universalism, too, where we affirm values like equity, generosity, interdependence, and love. These are not absolutes, but guiding principles for how we show up in the world.
Choosing where and how we engage online can reflect those values. Not perfectly. Not rigidly. But thoughtfully.
I know many Buddhist monks who don’t use social media at all and seem quite happy. Abstaining is an option, too.
But for those of us who want to stay connected, Mastodon might offer a way to walk the Middle Way: staying engaged with the world without losing our hearts in the process.
Final Thoughts: Choosing With Care
Social media isn’t inherently evil. But it isn’t neutral, either.
Every platform encourages certain behaviors. Every platform has values embedded into its design. By choosing where we spend our attention, we shape both our lives and the world around us.
If you’re tired of the manipulation, marketing, and anger of mainstream platforms, maybe it’s time to try something different.
Maybe it’s time to find your Middle Way online.
If you’re curious about Mastodon and how it fits into an ethical, values-driven life, I invite you to join me there.
Or simply take a step back, breathe, and notice:
- How does your online life make you feel?
- What small changes would bring you closer to peace, integrity, and joy?
Comments