Were you one of the score of people who watched the pre-Christmas town council live on Facebook? We weren't but informed sources state that if you were then this was your last opportunity to see the town council in action via that particular platform.
- Translation is possible on Zoom, whereas it isn't on Facebook.
- Zoom is felt to be less of a constraint on debate than Facebook.
But the clearest advantage for you and me for using Zoom was the prime one mentioned by the town council itself:
- Zoom fosters participation. (Facebook fosters problems.)
As a result, are we about to see a sea change in the way the town council transacts business? The implication is that this will be the case. Perhaps the town council will in future allow public involvement and contributions. They certainly have never done so before. Whether online or off, the public have never been able to have a say. True, the town council can and does invite specific representatives to present and be questioned but this is not the same as the general public having a general say.
Interestingly, we suspect that some people don't want to participate. They simply want to spectate. For this, Facebook is ideal.
But the problem with Facebook is that it's Facebook. It's sometimes poisoned ground where people can feel intimidated. It can be an upside-down world where some people, some of the time, cannot hold their tongues. It lends itself to extremes. It isn't always known for tolerance: any view other than the prevailing opinion can sometimes be shouted down.
As such, the benefits of moving to Zoom outweigh the benefits of using Facebook.