Earlier this week, Facebook announced plans to expand its artificial intelligence-based suicide prevention campaign. The company shared how the program has been working so far, essentially using "proactive detection" technology to scan posts for signs that the user might be suicidal and flagging them to Facebook moderators for next steps, which range from offering links to online resources all the way up to contacting first responders on the user's behalf.
The goal is to shorten the amount of time between a concerning post and Facebook being brought into the conversation. Previously, Facebook wouldn't get involved unless a friend manually flagged someone's post as seeming suicidal.
"When someone is expressing thoughts of suicide, it’s important to get them help as quickly as possible," wrote Facebook Vice President of Product Management Guy Rosen, on the company's blog.
Experts in suicide prevention are pretty excited about this plan, though some have minor reservations. Facebook's plans are "important and groundbreaking," Dr. Christine Moutier, chief medical officer at Americans for Suicide Prevention, writes in an e-mail, lauding this type of "creative and innovative solution."
"With the help of large tech companies like Facebook, we can reduce the suicide rate in the United States, furthering AFSP's Project 2025 goal: to reduce the rate 20% in the US by 2025," she writes.
AI has "demonstrated itself as an effective tool for identifying people who may be in crisis," writes National Suicide Prevention Lifeline Director John Draper, noting there are still some challenges when it comes to machine learning technology understanding the difference between someone joking with their friends and someone who may actually be on the verge of self-harm.
"We’ve been advising Facebook on how to provide assistance for persons in crisis through creating a more supportive environment on their social platform so that people who need help can get it faster, which ultimately, can save lives," he writes, adding that "notifying police is an absolute last resort."
Joining the chorus of supporters of Facebook's plan is Dr. Victor Schwartz of The Jed Foundation, who has two caveats related to transparency and training.
"We applaud Facebook's efforts to enhance their ability to identify and respond to users who may be at increased risk for self-harm," Schwartz writes in an e-mail. "We hope that Facebook users would be made aware of this new protocol and would be alerted to the impending intervention, and that first responders would be properly trained to respond to those in possible crisis."
To the latter point, first responders should be properly trained to respond to suicidal individuals and others experiencing a mental health crisis, but are often not. For example, earlier this month, a suicidal woman in Cobb County, Georgia, was shot and killed by police after she grabbed a gun. In August, a similar scene unfolded in Florida.
There is no doubt that deescalating this type of situation, especially when the person involved is armed, is difficult. That's why ensuring proper training is so important.
Skepticism remains high in the online community, with some worrying that this life-saving tech could be repurposed for more nefarious pursuits in the future. Though Facebook has provided a pretty decent high-level overview of this new tool — which users apparently won't be able to opt out of — the company has been extremely light on details of how it actually works.
Responding to critics worried about how Facebook may use this technology in the future, the company's chief security officer, Alex Stamos, stressed that "it's important to set good norms today around weighing data use versus utility and be thoughtful about bias creeping in."
It's perfectly rational to have concerns over the use and misuse of AI, but the truth is that tech like this is going to play a big role in coming years.
Between this and concerns about ensuring that first responders are properly trained, Facebook's new approach to suicide prevention feels like something humanity can feel cautiously optimistic about — but only time will truly tell.
Ultrasound of human baby.Image via 
IVF animated process.Image via 
A couple speaks with a fertility professional.Image via 
Love, Mom.Photo from Heidi Johnson 
A teen boy having a hard time. 
Hands hold a digital representation of the brain.Image via 
Mother and daughter work a puzzle.Image via 
Man and woman connect under the sunshine.Image via 
The obituary paints a comic, if bleak, picture. 
A Facebook post about the obituary.
Why do some folks use social media but don't engage?
Psychologist says people who never comment on social media share these 5 positive traits
For over 20 years, social media has developed into a staple in many people’s day-to-day lives. Whether it’s to keep in communication with friends and family, following the thoughts of celebrities, or watching cat videos while sipping your morning coffee, there seem to be two types of social media users: commenters and lurkers.
The term “lurker” sounds equally mysterious and insidious, with some social media users writing them off as non-participants at best or voyeurs at worst. However, mindfulness expert Lachlan Brown believes these non-commenters have some very psychologically positive and healthy traits. Let’s take a look at how each one of these traits could be beneficial and see how fruitful lurking might be even though it can drive content creators crazy.
1. Cautious about vulnerability
Consciously or not, making a post online or commenting on one puts you and your words out there. It’s a statement that everyone can see, even if it’s as simple as clicking “like.” Doing so opens yourself up to judgment, with all the good, bad, and potential misinterpretation that comes with it. Non-commenters would rather not open themselves up to that.
These silent users are connected to a concept of self-protection by simply not engaging. By just scrolling past posts or just reading/watching them without commentary, they’re preventing themselves from any downsides of sharing an opinion such as rejection, misunderstanding, or embarrassment. They also have more control on how much of themselves they’re willing to reveal to the general public, and tend to be more open face-to-face or during one-on-one/one-on-few private chats or DMs. This can be seen as a healthy boundary and prevents unnecessary exposure.
Considering many comment sections, especially involving political topics, are meant to stir negative emotional responses to increase engagement, being extra mindful about where, when, and what you comment might not be a bad idea. They might not even take the engagement bait at all. Or if they see a friend of theirs post something vulnerable, they feel more motivated to engage with them personally one-on-one rather than use social media to publicly check in on them.
2. Analytical and reflective mindset
How many times have you gone onto Reddit, YouTube, or any other site and just skimmed past comments that are just different versions of “yes, and,” “no, but,” or “yes, but”? Or the ever insightful, formerly popular comment “First!” in a thread? These silent browsers lean against adding to such noise unless they have some valid and thoughtful contribution (if they bother to comment period).
These non-posters are likely wired on reflective thinking rather than their initial intuition. Not to say that all those who comment aren’t thoughtful, but many tend to react quickly and comment based on their initial feelings rather than absorbing the information, thinking it over, researching or testing their belief, and then posting it. For "lurkers," it could by their very nature to just do all of that and not post it at all, or share their thoughts and findings privately with a friend. All in all, it’s a preference of substance over speed.
3. High sense of self-awareness
Carried over from the first two listed traits, these silent social media users incorporate their concern over their vulnerability and their reflective mindset into digital self-awareness. They know what triggers responses out of them and what causes them to engage in impulsive behavior. It could be that they have engaged with a troll in the past and felt foolish. Or that they just felt sad after a post or got into an unnecessary argument that impacted them offline. By knowing themselves and seeing what’s being discussed, they choose to weigh their words carefully or just not participate at all. It’s a form of self-preservation through restraint.
4. Prefer to observe rather than perform
Some folks treat social media as information, entertainment, or a mix of both, and commenting can feel like they’re yelling at the TV, clapping alone in a movie theater when the credits roll, or yelling “That’s not true!” to a news anchor that will never hear them. But contrary to that, social media is a place where those yells, claps, and accusations can be seen and get a response. By its design, social media is considered by experts and the media as performative, regardless of whether it is positive or negative. Taking all of the previously mentioned traits into account, one can see why they would prefer to “observe the play” rather than get up on the stage of Facebook or X.
On top of that, these non-commenters could be using social media differently than those who choose to fully engage with it. Using this type of navigation, there may be nothing for them to comment about. Some commenters are even vying for this for their mental health. There are articles about how to better curate your social media feeds and manipulate algorithms to create a better social media experience to avoid unnecessary conflict or mentally tiring debate.
If you go on a blocking spree on all of your accounts and just follow the posters that boost you, it could turn your social media into a nice part of your routine as you mainly engage with others face-to-face or privately. In terms of commenting, if your curated Instagram is just following cute dogs and all you have to offer for a comment is “cute dog,” you might just enjoy the picture and then move on with your day rather than join in the noise. These non-commenters aren’t in the show and they’re fine with it.
5. Less motivated by social validation
The last trait that Brown showcases is that social media users who browse without posting tend to be independent from external validation, at least online. Social media is built to grow through feedback loops such as awarding likes, shares, and reposts of your content along with notifications letting you know that a new person follows you or wants to connect. This can lead many people to connect their activity on social media with their sense of self worth, especially with adolescents who are still figuring out their place in the world and have still-developing brains.
Engaging in social media via likes, shares, comments, and posts rewards our brains by having them release dopamine, which makes us feel good and can easily become addictive. For whatever reason, non-commenters don’t rely on social media as a means to gauge their social capital or self worth. This doesn’t make them better than those who do. While some non-commenters could have healthier ways to boost their self worth or release dopamine into their systems, many get that validation from equally unhealthy sources offline. That said, many non-commenters’ silence could be a display of independence and self confidence.
Whether you frequently comment online or don’t, it’s good to understand why you do or don’t. Analyzing your habits can help you determine whether your online engagement is healthy, or needs to be tweaked. With that information, you can then create a healthy social media experience that works for you.