...er...yes? I mean, that's why social media sites are popular. To go beyond text communication, that's why Instagram is popular even though its photo editing capabilities are less expansive and sophisticated than your camera + GIMP. Social media sites demand little from the producer and the consumer, which is partially why we are so inclined to spend time there instead of writing full blog posts or letters to Mom.

Should society just acclimate itself to be less reactionary to social media quips? Sure, but that's a bit of begging the question there. Social media networks are so strong because they can cause such emotional reaction for such little energy input. I'm not an evolutionary biologist, but I halfway assume that there's something physiologically appealing about the whole process, and that something would fight back against the ability for society to collectively take a deep breath and patiently consume the stream of social media.

You and I want both the same thing: patience and empathy in civic discourse. But you have more faith than I do that it can/should happen even when the scales are so lopsided: physically, it gets easier and easier to make and disseminate our thoughts, but our ability to physically process such information does not scale as well.