Facebook seems have digressed since it's creation. It started for a bunch of college kids to find parties and hook-ups. Now it's just this odd melting pot of relatives, friends, and acquaintances. Add a little electronic news and everyone is only a click away from sharing international sadness.
I don't think there should be censorship. It's great that the internet can tell us when Prince, David Bowie, Gene Wilder, or anyone else dies but do we really need Auntie Ruth helping spread the news? It's not like she heard it down the street...the article was shared from Yahoo News and they got it from the local news.
It's good to know what's going on in the world. There was already enough talk that TV was making the world seem a dark and scary place. Not only in coverage of all the trauma of the world but the general TV news template of repeating the same tragedy over and over the entire day.
It's just a little frustrating because some of these people died of natural causes after long lives of being loved by millions. David Bowie and Gene Wilder for example. I enjoyed their work but can't recall a time seeing/listening to them. Once they pass away everyone jumps to the top of their fan clubs. Others seem unfair; Prince for example who had more to give and Robin Williams who struggled and lost his battle to depression.
For those who remember the age before TV being so prominent do you miss those times? For those who remember the dawn of the internet do you miss it not being a thing? Even if just a little bit?
Personally I know the good outweighs the bad, or at least I want to think that. Being able to shine a light into the world's corruption is a powerful thing. My extremely basic understanding was that TV helped show what the Vietnam War was like and possibly helped cut it shorter than it could have been. I'm just starting to miss the annoying Jibjab videos and baby photos amidst the trove of tragedy.
![frown :(](./images/smilies/frowning-face.png)