3 ms·
The difference is asbestos clearly and directly caused harm, the social media addiction stuff stand on pretty dubious science to say the least.
by jimmyjazz14 1mo ago
The difference is asbestos clearly and directly caused harm, the social media addiction stuff stand on pretty dubious science to say the least.
- bearjaws 1mo agoThe problem wasn't as simple as it caused harm, it was the companies knew it caused harm and did nothing. Just like how Meta, it's staff and leadership all knew they were making decisions that harmed people, and did nothing to stop it while profiting immensely.
- Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 1mo agoTo be fair, aesbestos makers too knew and didn't stop selling it.
- inigyou 1mo agoSo do sodium hydroxide makers, they know it's toxic and they still don't stop selling it.
- Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 28d agoIt's not the same. Aesbestos makers knew, their customers didn't, and they actively fought against the customers knowing it. Whereas NaOH makers know and go as far as writing it on the packaging.
- jplusequalt 1mo ago>the social media addiction stuff stand on pretty dubious science to say the least. There are multiple studies showing that social media use leads to worse mental health in users.