The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
9 Points

Social Networking is NOT the best way to develop relationships

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/20/2016 Category: Technology
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 710 times Debate No: 92923
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




Twitter,Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr, and Skype! What do these five have in common? They are social network sites! It is the generation of Internet and these sites are ruling over teenagers and young adults (20 -30), but it does not mean that you can trust Social Media with your relationship?! Imagine this, even in reality (face to face) someone can just turn your love into a game, how would it be if it was in social media?

According to U.S Rates and Statistics, the divorce rate has been on the decline since 1980, the fact remains that there are people out there getting divorced. While it may not be as high as 50 percent rate that has long become the go-to stat, no marriage is perfect therefore no marriage is safe from divorce. While experts try to predict what leads to divorce as means to lessen the amount of them, in the past few years there has been a new factor: SOCIAL MEDIA IS A REASON WHY PEOPLE GET DIVORCED

It's not only the married couples who gets divorced because of Social Media. Couples who wish to be married tend to break up because of Social Media, either it's liking a picture of his/her ex-girlfriend/ex-boyfriend or hiding something from their particular partner. Social media can ruin relationships.


Hello and thank you for posting this debate.

My opponent has claimed that social media CANNOT be trusted because it can lead divorce. This would in fact be a fallacious claim.
Firstly, Social media is just a label for a form of communication "it" is not conscious and does not act on its own without human input. This is in fact what my opponent must prove to justify her claim.
Removing the label "social media" from the issue and replacing it with communication (since in fact that"s what it is), how creditable does this claim seem?
Communication cannot be trusted because it can lead to divorce; now thats a pretty hard justification to make! So this means my opponent suggests that communication causes divorce". Which obviously is not the case. We hear all the time that "communication is key to a healthy relationship".
According the Psychology today and many other sources out there, communication is key to a healthy and successful marriage. So if anything, the LACK of communication can cause a divorce but that isn"t my point because anything can be a contributing factor to a divorce (lack communication).
The key thing to understand that the reason for divorce due to the person(s) involved and their decisions. Can liking a photo of an ex-gf cause an argument or a break up? Absolutely but it was the action taken upon the individual to do so. Social media in no way demanded or forced the individual to "like a photo".
Social media can be trusted and it"s the individual you have to look out for. As far as I know, social media is not conscious and requires human input. Yet, you claim that social media IS the cause.
Please expand on your claim on how social media is
1) conscious
2) performs actions without a human input
And most importantly:
3) how humans are the not cause for their divorce

Yet, if you go back to the basic idea that social media can cause a divorce" well then a rainy day, a flat tire, and children can cause a divorce too and with your logic implied nothing should be trusted.
Debate Round No. 1


Jinnie_Shin_Yeon forfeited this round.


My opponent forfeited.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by SJM 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro lacked arguments and then forfeited a round in which was suppose to refute con's. Therefore his arguments stand.
Vote Placed by Amedexyius 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: While my personal opinion on this view corresponds with Pro, her lack to sustain a proper argument has given the debate to Con.