I think we often times confuse the harms of "people being able to talk to each other en masse" with "things uniquely caused by Facebook."
I am not sure why this is, but I think a large part of it is that it sounds much better to rail against Facebook than to say "I don't like the outcomes when large groups of people are allowed to talk to each other online without intermediaries." But really, the second thing is what you are typically actually saying.
Maybe a principled defense can be made for the quiet part - who knows. but it annoys me that it is implicit and not stated because I never understand what people are criticizing FB for.
I am not sure why this is, but I think a large part of it is that it sounds much better to rail against Facebook than to say "I don't like the outcomes when large groups of people are allowed to talk to each other online without intermediaries." But really, the second thing is what you are typically actually saying.