4 ms·

I think the harms of social media are overblown and distorted. The infamous Facebook leaks were studies conducted with under 50 girls. Only 3% and 18% said Inst

I think the harms of social media are overblown and distorted. The infamous Facebook leaks were studies conducted with under 50 girls. Only 3% and 18% said Instagram made them feel "much worse" or "somewhat worse" respectively. 8% and 29% respectively said it made them feel "much better" or "somewhat better". The rest were neutral. My take reading the actual data [1][2] after reading media coverage is that was way overblown. The main negative feelings "body image", "FOMO", "social comparison" and so forth were definitely the main negative feelings affecting girls before social media, too - I can say that from firsthand experience. I worry that social media is a red herring, distracting things that may really be contributing to stress and anxiety. Remember, social media isn't the only change society has and continues to experience. Things like, declining labor force participation, rising inequality, and more are likely more significant changes. Narrow example: 45% of teens reported that fear of climate change "negatively affected their daily life and functioning" [3]. 1. https://about.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Instagram-Teen-Annotated-Research-Deck-2.pdf https://about.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Instagram-Te... 2. https://about.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Instagram-Teen-Annotated-Research-Deck-1.pdf https://about.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Instagram-Te... 3. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3918955 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3918955

bedobi 5y ago
I try to be evidence based but social media being harmful is one of those things I personally don't really need a lot of hard data and evidence to be convinced. At this point it just seems self evident to me. (and I don't just mean harmful for me personally - I think it's blatantly obvious is harms basically every individual and societies as a whole as well) + if you're worried about climate change, isn't social media the medium through which a huge part of all the nonsense denial gets spread and popularized? (same for COVID and any number of other things)
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  Social media is good and bad like everything else. I don’t think it’s self evident. Climate change denial is spread on social media, but so is climate change activism. Propaganda is spread on social media by Russia, but it’s also used by Ukrainians to share their story easily with the world. Good and bad.
  - Groxx 5y ago
    In broad strokes I agree, and I'm pretty sure social media is here to stay. But I do very much think the current implementations are net-losses, probably primarily due to advertising having horrifically perverse incentives for human behavior. And they are all advertising platforms first and foremost at the moment. Easier communication brings out a lot of higher highs and lower lows, I think that's unavoidable. But I do think it can be substantially better than it is now.
    - johnnyanmac 5y ago
      > primarily due to advertising having horrifically perverse incentives for human behavior. And they are all advertising platforms first and foremost at the moment. no different from the rest of society as we know it today. Games now include ads, paid streaming platforms are STILL having ads for customers (needing to pay extra to opt-out), TV has commercials, real life has anything you can paint on, etc. But most of us learn to filter out the ads. I don't see them as the biggest problem here so much as a lack of moderation.
- johnnyanmac 5y ago
  >social media being harmful is one of those things I personally don't really need a lot of hard data and evidence to be convinced. I do. This same stance has been made for every media at some point in history. I feel in every case it's simply a smokescreen to hide deeper symptoms that no one wants to consider acknowledging, let alone treating. > if you're worried about climate change, isn't social media the medium through which a huge part of all the nonsense denial gets spread and popularized? it's a double edged sword. It's also why many youth may find out about climate change to begin with. cutting off all access simply creates ignorance instead of at the bare minimum awareness of the arguments being made. Maybe instead of blaming Facebook for the loonies not being listened to (if you're worried about climate change, the loonies clearly failed) we actually take actino to start preserving the envionment? But no, that takes actual congress bills to agree on.
oblio 5y ago
> The main negative feelings "body image", "FOMO", "social comparison" and so forth were definitely the main negative feelings affecting girls before social media, too - I can say that from firsthand experience. The difference is the impact and ubiquity. Those negative you mention are now on steroids, because they're <<everywhere>> <<all the time>>.

bedobi 5y ago

I try to be evidence based but social media being harmful is one of those things I personally don't really need a lot of hard data and evidence to be convinced. At this point it just seems self evident to me. (and I don't just mean harmful for me personally - I think it's blatantly obvious is harms basically every individual and societies as a whole as well) + if you're worried about climate change, isn't social media the medium through which a huge part of all the nonsense denial gets spread and popularized? (same for COVID and any number of other things)

vineyardmike 5y ago
Social media is good and bad like everything else. I don’t think it’s self evident. Climate change denial is spread on social media, but so is climate change activism. Propaganda is spread on social media by Russia, but it’s also used by Ukrainians to share their story easily with the world. Good and bad.
- Groxx 5y ago
  In broad strokes I agree, and I'm pretty sure social media is here to stay. But I do very much think the current implementations are net-losses, probably primarily due to advertising having horrifically perverse incentives for human behavior. And they are all advertising platforms first and foremost at the moment. Easier communication brings out a lot of higher highs and lower lows, I think that's unavoidable. But I do think it can be substantially better than it is now.
  - johnnyanmac 5y ago
    > primarily due to advertising having horrifically perverse incentives for human behavior. And they are all advertising platforms first and foremost at the moment. no different from the rest of society as we know it today. Games now include ads, paid streaming platforms are STILL having ads for customers (needing to pay extra to opt-out), TV has commercials, real life has anything you can paint on, etc. But most of us learn to filter out the ads. I don't see them as the biggest problem here so much as a lack of moderation.
johnnyanmac 5y ago
>social media being harmful is one of those things I personally don't really need a lot of hard data and evidence to be convinced. I do. This same stance has been made for every media at some point in history. I feel in every case it's simply a smokescreen to hide deeper symptoms that no one wants to consider acknowledging, let alone treating. > if you're worried about climate change, isn't social media the medium through which a huge part of all the nonsense denial gets spread and popularized? it's a double edged sword. It's also why many youth may find out about climate change to begin with. cutting off all access simply creates ignorance instead of at the bare minimum awareness of the arguments being made. Maybe instead of blaming Facebook for the loonies not being listened to (if you're worried about climate change, the loonies clearly failed) we actually take actino to start preserving the envionment? But no, that takes actual congress bills to agree on.

oblio 5y ago

> The main negative feelings "body image", "FOMO", "social comparison" and so forth were definitely the main negative feelings affecting girls before social media, too - I can say that from firsthand experience. The difference is the impact and ubiquity. Those negative you mention are now on steroids, because they're <<everywhere>> <<all the time>>.