When Engagement Replaces Truth on Social Media (Part Two) The Personal Cost of Constant Engagement I used social media as a place to reclaim my voice. What I didn’t expect was how often that voice would be penalized rather than engaged. Content that clearly violated stated platform rules frequently remained untouched, while direct, challenging speech was treated as the problem. That contradiction was impossible to ignore. What unsettled me most was recognizing a familiar pattern: systems that silence not because a voice is wrong, but because it’s inconvenient. Because it disrupts comfort. Because it refuses to perform in ways that are profitable or palatable. This dynamic isn’t unique to one platform. Different branding, same incentives. For a time, my language was raw and confrontational. Some of that was intentional. Some of it was necessary. Reclaiming a silenced voice often involves anger, and I don’t disown that phase. It was part of learning how to speak at all. But growth doesn’t mean staying there forever. Eventually, I realized that constantly arguing inside systems designed to provoke wasn’t empowerment — it was exhaustion. Saying everything isn’t the same as being heard. Precision carries farther than volume. And not every fight deserves my energy. This isn’t a call to silence anyone else, and it isn’t an attack on individual users. It’s an observation about incentives and their consequences. When engagement replaces truth, everyone pays a price. The real choice is whether we keep feeding that system — or start choosing our aim more carefully. #SocialMedia #DigitalCulture #MentalHealthAwareness #SpeakingOut #OnlineHarassment #FindingYourVoi