Facebook
After coming across Hanna’s post in his own feeds, well-known evangelist Joshua Feuerstein joined the quest to add said emoji—racking up thousands of shares, likes and comments in just a matter of days.
Though the response was overwhelming, a spokesperson from Facebook has since confirmed that the cross reaction is not part of the platform’s agenda, telling HuffPost:
“This reaction is not actually available on Facebook, and is not something we’re working on.”
How’s that for supporting “all communities?”
If we’re being honest, I feel like the “KISS” method is probably in everyone’s best interest here: Keep it simple stupid. Rarely do I use more than the original “like” reaction in response to something I see online. Do we really need a full keyboard of options—especially ones that are politically and religiously charged?
Facebook is already a breeding ground for intense, negatively-fueled and “passionate” arguments. Someone’s always offending somebody else, and I feel like incorporating this array of emojis just increases the turmoil among users. And what about the whole different can of worms–accommodating other religious affiliations? The world isn’t made up of just Christian communities and LGBTQ communities. If it’s in Facebook’s best interest to support “all communities,” this might just be the most complicated way possible.
The debate is surely fueling a heated fire on Feuerstein’s viral post.
Social media is ultimately a place for people to have a virtual presence where they can connect and belong. While as a Christian, I’d be impressed to see Facebook include a cross emoji, I think Facebook’s current approach leads to division, not unity.
And that’s not what Jesus or Facebook is all about.
