Another hypothesis not bothering with evidence, is that due to increased media, mass media, and internet media exposure, we lack a 'quasi-local' version of what

Another hypothesis not bothering with evidence, is that due to increased media, mass media, and internet media exposure, we lack a 'quasi-local' version of what success can look like in a meaningful way. The internet and mass media have 'de-smallified' our world, in that we're in constant exposure to those who have made it. They tell us their secrets, how they made it, and when it doesn't work for us, we get blame ourselves and take our failures as personal. There is an extreme selection bias for success in what we see in the world. Failure, in that same sense, is hidden. Kids don't see it except on rare occasions where it can be spun positively. Kids aren't exposed to the real grinding failures of just trying to get by. So we have two very different distributions forming childhood mental frameworks about what success looks like. Likewise, exposure is more and more purely digital. There's no grounding in any of this, or acknowledgement that most of why anything happens is due to circumstance and random chance. Youth get put in a situation where success is effectively (based on their abilities and view of success) impossible.