It's good to see someone pushing back against this nonsense, which of course is being accelerated by the same types on book-banning sprees: conservatives who know they're deeply unpopular with...
It's good to see someone pushing back against this nonsense, which of course is being accelerated by the same types on book-banning sprees: conservatives who know they're deeply unpopular with younger voters (and upcoming voters) and want to stop people from having an escape from bubbles of indoctrination.
I suspect young people are more paralyzed by the invasive helicopter parenting seeking to spy on and control every social interaction and information consumed than by access to "too much information." (Panopticon is psychological abuse.) Or by living in fear of being randomly shot because we allow just anyone to own weapons of mass murder. Or being cognizant of the state of wealth inequality.
Then there's the reality that anxiety disorders don't typically need a cause other than a biological "fuck you." You don't need a reason to feel like you're walking blindly down a flight of stairs while carrying something expensive...it just happens.
It's not nonsense. It's a very reasonable hypothesis that, apparently, was tested and doesn't seem to be holding up. But scientists weren't wrong to think there might be something to it, worth...
It's not nonsense. It's a very reasonable hypothesis that, apparently, was tested and doesn't seem to be holding up. But scientists weren't wrong to think there might be something to it, worth testing.
Also, bad things do sometimes happen to young people online. They happen to people of any age. Even if they don't show up in the summary statistics, it happens often enough to be a bit wary.
Though it may be hard to untangle them, many things can be contributing factors to mental illness.
Maybe I'm misreading it, but I think you're pushing way too far in the opposite direction here and going beyond what the article (reasonably) suggests. The important notion is we have to look...
It's good to see someone pushing back against this nonsense, which of course is being accelerated by the same types on book-banning sprees: conservatives who know they're deeply unpopular with younger voters (and upcoming voters) and want to stop people from having an escape from bubbles of indoctrination.
Maybe I'm misreading it, but I think you're pushing way too far in the opposite direction here and going beyond what the article (reasonably) suggests. The important notion is we have to look elsewhere for the root causes of rising rates of mental health problems, but it does not at all mean that social media does not have serious problems right now.
Many of todays parents are young enough to experience the effects of social media doomscrolling and algorithms stimulating addictive behavior themselves. I've experienced it myself and I know it has bad effects on me. Normally when I fall into it it's not the sole cause why I'm feeling kind of down, but it does make things worse and avoiding it makes me feel better.
You can bet I will use this experience when making rules about social media usage for my future hypothetical children, and I'm very very far from a book banning conservative. I grew up on the internet and it formed me greatly, but that was old internet before todays social media emerged. And apart from not being ruled by engagement algorithms, it also was much less dumb than social media. "Having an escape from bubbles of indoctrination" imo usually just means an escape from one bubble to a different one that's not really much smarter, just different. That still may be positive, but I don't consider it much of a win.
I also do believe it rewired my brain to some degree, worsened my ability to focus on one thing, and one of the reasons why I started to meditate regularly is to reverse it. It is working and while it's quite slow, it's not really that subtle either.
Then there's the reality that anxiety disorders don't typically need a cause other than a biological "fuck you." You don't need a reason to feel like you're walking blindly down a flight of stairs while carrying something expensive...it just happens.
This is true (though I don't really agree with the "typically"), but there's also usually no easy solution to just reverse that and dealing with it successfully almost always requires behavioral changes. Avoiding social media does help some people.
I like your point about the old internet not being dumb at all. Frankly, having new technology arrive alongside many different ways and places to experience it was an amazing platform for...
I like your point about the old internet not being dumb at all. Frankly, having new technology arrive alongside many different ways and places to experience it was an amazing platform for discovery for adolescents in the 90s and 00s.
Computers more generally required young people to memorize operating system processes, file structures, protocols and hardware needs that today's young people aren't required to. Granted, a well organized smart phone is a testament to how a user can best personalize their own experience, the swiping, basic app
Simple, flashy UIs and lack of troubleshooting required has made technology use more akin to working at McDonalds than in an actual kitchen.
I think it’s likely that there are indeed harms associated with social media use (and especially, social media obsession), but at the same time I agree that attempts to restrict a whole group of...
I think it’s likely that there are indeed harms associated with social media use (and especially, social media obsession), but at the same time I agree that attempts to restrict a whole group of people’s ability to communicate should be sending up red flags aplenty. That ability to communicate enables youth to recognize and act to remove themselves from abusive circumstances, and as you noted to become active participants in politics by becoming informed or voting themselves if becoming a voter soon or help spread the word around if they’re not.
Should parents have a say in what their kids can do online? Probably, but I think that say should probably be a gradient that tapers as kids grow through their teens into adults. In fact, that should probably apply to all manner of restrictions by parents on children — I believe that the tight grip that many parents have held over their kids in the past several decades that more or less flips “off” like a light switch the moment they turn 18 has done a lot of harm, because it stripped those teenagers of their ability to grow and learn and then dumped them into the world unprepared.
Two things need to be said after reading The Anxious Generation. First, this book is going to sell a lot of copies, because Jonathan Haidt is telling a scary story about children’s development that many parents are primed to believe. Second, the book’s repeated suggestion that digital technologies are rewiring our children’s brains and causing an epidemic of mental illness is not supported by science. Worse, the bold proposal that social media is to blame might distract us from effectively responding to the real causes of the current mental-health crisis in young people.
It's good to see someone pushing back against this nonsense, which of course is being accelerated by the same types on book-banning sprees: conservatives who know they're deeply unpopular with younger voters (and upcoming voters) and want to stop people from having an escape from bubbles of indoctrination.
I suspect young people are more paralyzed by the invasive helicopter parenting seeking to spy on and control every social interaction and information consumed than by access to "too much information." (Panopticon is psychological abuse.) Or by living in fear of being randomly shot because we allow just anyone to own weapons of mass murder. Or being cognizant of the state of wealth inequality.
Then there's the reality that anxiety disorders don't typically need a cause other than a biological "fuck you." You don't need a reason to feel like you're walking blindly down a flight of stairs while carrying something expensive...it just happens.
It's not nonsense. It's a very reasonable hypothesis that, apparently, was tested and doesn't seem to be holding up. But scientists weren't wrong to think there might be something to it, worth testing.
Also, bad things do sometimes happen to young people online. They happen to people of any age. Even if they don't show up in the summary statistics, it happens often enough to be a bit wary.
Though it may be hard to untangle them, many things can be contributing factors to mental illness.
Maybe I'm misreading it, but I think you're pushing way too far in the opposite direction here and going beyond what the article (reasonably) suggests. The important notion is we have to look elsewhere for the root causes of rising rates of mental health problems, but it does not at all mean that social media does not have serious problems right now.
Many of todays parents are young enough to experience the effects of social media doomscrolling and algorithms stimulating addictive behavior themselves. I've experienced it myself and I know it has bad effects on me. Normally when I fall into it it's not the sole cause why I'm feeling kind of down, but it does make things worse and avoiding it makes me feel better.
You can bet I will use this experience when making rules about social media usage for my future hypothetical children, and I'm very very far from a book banning conservative. I grew up on the internet and it formed me greatly, but that was old internet before todays social media emerged. And apart from not being ruled by engagement algorithms, it also was much less dumb than social media. "Having an escape from bubbles of indoctrination" imo usually just means an escape from one bubble to a different one that's not really much smarter, just different. That still may be positive, but I don't consider it much of a win.
I also do believe it rewired my brain to some degree, worsened my ability to focus on one thing, and one of the reasons why I started to meditate regularly is to reverse it. It is working and while it's quite slow, it's not really that subtle either.
This is true (though I don't really agree with the "typically"), but there's also usually no easy solution to just reverse that and dealing with it successfully almost always requires behavioral changes. Avoiding social media does help some people.
I like your point about the old internet not being dumb at all. Frankly, having new technology arrive alongside many different ways and places to experience it was an amazing platform for discovery for adolescents in the 90s and 00s.
Computers more generally required young people to memorize operating system processes, file structures, protocols and hardware needs that today's young people aren't required to. Granted, a well organized smart phone is a testament to how a user can best personalize their own experience, the swiping, basic app
Simple, flashy UIs and lack of troubleshooting required has made technology use more akin to working at McDonalds than in an actual kitchen.
I think it’s likely that there are indeed harms associated with social media use (and especially, social media obsession), but at the same time I agree that attempts to restrict a whole group of people’s ability to communicate should be sending up red flags aplenty. That ability to communicate enables youth to recognize and act to remove themselves from abusive circumstances, and as you noted to become active participants in politics by becoming informed or voting themselves if becoming a voter soon or help spread the word around if they’re not.
Should parents have a say in what their kids can do online? Probably, but I think that say should probably be a gradient that tapers as kids grow through their teens into adults. In fact, that should probably apply to all manner of restrictions by parents on children — I believe that the tight grip that many parents have held over their kids in the past several decades that more or less flips “off” like a light switch the moment they turn 18 has done a lot of harm, because it stripped those teenagers of their ability to grow and learn and then dumped them into the world unprepared.