3 ms·

Sure you can. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumption_of_Tide_Pods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumption_of_Tide_Pods

kick 7y ago
Surely you'd agree that's not the fault of the information as much as leaving small children in reach of poisonous objects without teaching them that they shouldn't consume them, wouldn't you? The article notes that it was already a problem before the meme started, and the amount of consumption caused by the internet meme (18 cases; no deaths noted out of those) is still minuscule.
- debaserab2 7y ago
  Considering the demographic targetted by the meme was teenagers, I'd say it doesn't matter if you taught them or not. Disinformation campaigns on the internet are a thing. Kids don't flawlessly execute every piece of good advice given and sometimes you really do need to stop little Johnny from jumping off a bridge just because his friend said so.
  - kick 7y ago
    The demographic targeted by the meme was teenagers. This does not imply that teenagers were the majority of people who ended up consuming the pods. Kids don't flawlessly execute every piece of good advice given, sure, but if you give them the proper foundation it's extremely unlikely that they would do something like this. Partially related but by no means an argument against your main point: there's a fun xkcd comic that points out how absurd the bridge argument is. Parent: No, you can't go. Cueball: But all my friends— Parent: If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too? Cueball: Oh, jeez. Probably. Parent: What!? Why!? Cueball: Because all my friends did. Cueball: Think about it — which scenario is more likely: Cueball: Every single person I know, many of them levelheaded and afraid of heights, abruptly went crazy at exactly the same time... Cueball: ...or the bridge is on fire? Parent: ...I, uh...hmm. Cueball: Imagine reading this on CNN: "Many fled their vehicles and jumped from the bridge. Those who stayed behind..." Cueball: Is something good about to happen to those people? Parent: Maybe they'll find cookies? Cueball: OK, you stay. I'm jumping.

kick 7y ago

Surely you'd agree that's not the fault of the information as much as leaving small children in reach of poisonous objects without teaching them that they shouldn't consume them, wouldn't you? The article notes that it was already a problem before the meme started, and the amount of consumption caused by the internet meme (18 cases; no deaths noted out of those) is still minuscule.

debaserab2 7y ago
Considering the demographic targetted by the meme was teenagers, I'd say it doesn't matter if you taught them or not. Disinformation campaigns on the internet are a thing. Kids don't flawlessly execute every piece of good advice given and sometimes you really do need to stop little Johnny from jumping off a bridge just because his friend said so.
- kick 7y ago
  The demographic targeted by the meme was teenagers. This does not imply that teenagers were the majority of people who ended up consuming the pods. Kids don't flawlessly execute every piece of good advice given, sure, but if you give them the proper foundation it's extremely unlikely that they would do something like this. Partially related but by no means an argument against your main point: there's a fun xkcd comic that points out how absurd the bridge argument is. Parent: No, you can't go. Cueball: But all my friends— Parent: If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too? Cueball: Oh, jeez. Probably. Parent: What!? Why!? Cueball: Because all my friends did. Cueball: Think about it — which scenario is more likely: Cueball: Every single person I know, many of them levelheaded and afraid of heights, abruptly went crazy at exactly the same time... Cueball: ...or the bridge is on fire? Parent: ...I, uh...hmm. Cueball: Imagine reading this on CNN: "Many fled their vehicles and jumped from the bridge. Those who stayed behind..." Cueball: Is something good about to happen to those people? Parent: Maybe they'll find cookies? Cueball: OK, you stay. I'm jumping.