Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

afterbabel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 1001 posts

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#231

Post by olibhel »

rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

In my country, India, these platforms are used less for free speech and more for brainwashing and spreading hate and misinformation. Most of these posts are in Hindi, a major language around here, and call for all kinds of hate such as suppression of a specific religion, call for genocide, invading and acquiring neighboring countries etc.

I've tried reporting such posts multiple times but hate filled posts are neither removed, nor restricted. If a platform cannot provide adequate moderation, it should stop operating in my country and be held responsible for providing a platform for spreading hate pseudo-anonmously.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#232

Post by bigstrat2003 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #15
atleastoptimal wrote: post #7

The solution is unironically just to do what China does. Create restrictions on how long kids can use the web and what they can use. It won't be perfect but it will be the biggest influence towards better habits and cultural norms.

Jonathan Haidt, the author of this article, was on Real Time w Bill Maher recently, and has some simple recommendations with respect to phones and social media: 1. No smartphones for kids before high school — give them only flip phones in middle school. 2. No social media before age 16. 3. Make schools phone-free, by putting devices in phone lockers or Yondr pouches. 4. Give kids far more free play and independence,…

As usual, Haidt is spot on. There's no reason a child should have a smartphone, or be on social media having the algorithms warp their brains. Honestly I would say kids shouldn't have phones at all, except that these days they can't easily find public phones to call their parents (unlike when we were kids). But solving that problem certainly doesn't require a smartphone.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#233

Post by Ekaros »

zigman1 wrote: post #206
Aurornis wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the constant comparison hellhole like Instagram that is causing mental illness. Anecdotally, Instagram ranks much lower than Reddit for causing problems among the young kids I’ve worked with. Reddit is an absolutely cesspool of misinformation, fake stories, propaganda, and rampant doomerism. Scrolling Instagram can’t hold a candle to the militant doomerism that seethes from sites like Reddit. I think it’s an uncomf…

I think that the first lesson anyone whos signing on Reddit should be, to approach each post with a belief it is fake and is trying to see if it can deceive you. I know that for the hn crowd this sounds as obvious as the everyday weather, but not for kids with tech-illiterate parents.

Whatever there is to say about 4chan at least I think at one point it directly told this message.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#234

Post by rsolva »

burningChrome wrote: post #84

I will attempt to at least inject some hope into this discussion. My formative years from ages 15-25 were spent in the 80's and 90's. It was the apex of the mall experience. We saw the mall as a place to get away from our parents, hang out with our buds, run into other classmates and feel some sense of freedom while running amok playing video games in the arcade and chowing down tacos in the food court. Then smartpho…

Not only malls, in Europe and Scandinavia, many small towns and cities that has seen greater days are working hard to make it more livable for people of all ages, incentivizing small shops of all kinds and prioritizing bikes and pedestrians while the cars have to stay on the outskirts of the town center.

It takes time though, but I see a trend and a hunger among people to reclaime physical spaces and to spend more time amongst each other, making room for chance encounters etc.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#235

Post by zigman1 »

raziel2p wrote: post #223
zigman1 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the country's role or more specifically, the role of education to equip citizens with skills that will help them navigate virtual, deceiving and fake internet space.

That is certainly an opinion and a higher goal we could hold ourselves to, but education is generally just a way to ensure kids grow up to be good citizens - and today good tends to mean productive, contributing to the economy.

See my reply to the other comment of my same opinion :)

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#236

Post by lynx23 »

thegrim000 wrote: post #212
rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

It's funny .. earlier today there was a front page HN post about the federal government mandating safer circular saws. It seemed like the majority of users in the thread were in favor of the federal government mandating technology changes to prevent harm from being done to the population. Now for this issue, there's harm being done to children, and the majority of users in the thread seem to be against government int…

Because it is the parents responsibility to set boundaries for their children. It can be complicated at times, granted. But that doesn't make it less of their job. Heck, I got my first CD player with 14. Yes, I felt left out at school, but... guess what, I didn't die. Children need to learn that there are rules, and someone else dictates them. Throwing tantrums is a typical reaction that needs to be weeded out as a part of growing up.

Besides, the "somebody has to think about the children" meme is slowly but surely getting old and tiresome. Not somebody... Their PARENTS. If you dont feel like setting boundaries for your children, please, with sugar on top, dont have any.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#237

Post by satvikpendem »

olibhel wrote: post #231
rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

In my country, India, these platforms are used less for free speech and more for brainwashing and spreading hate and misinformation. Most of these posts are in Hindi, a major language around here, and call for all kinds of hate such as suppression of a specific religion, call for genocide, invading and acquiring neighboring countries etc. I've tried reporting such posts multiple times but hate filled posts are neithe…

How is this example any different than what the parent has said? If people feel these platforms are negatively impacting them, they should stop using them. Or do you believe others or the government has a right to disallow what people want to watch via their own choices? You may call it brainwashing but others may disagree.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#238

Post by brylie »

rgbrenner wrote: post #145

The author had it right in the first paragraph. In the 90s version of this hysteria, Congress passed a law that would have prevented access to education medical information, dirty curse words, and other filth from being published on the internet to protect the children. The federal government fought a case all the way to the Supreme Court to enforce it. If they had won that case, the internet would look very differen…

Note that the reforms suggested by the author are primarily normative, not legislative:

""" More specifically, we’d try to implement these four norms as widely as possible:

1. No smartphones before high school (as a norm, not a law; parents can just give younger kids flip phones, basic phones, or phone watches).

2. No social media before 16 (as a norm, but one that would be much more effective if supported by laws such as the proposed update to COPPA, the Kids Online Safety Act, state-level age-appropriate design codes, and new social media bills like the bipartisan Protecting Kids on Social Media Act, or like the state level bills passed in Utah last year and in Florida last month).

3. Phone-free schools (use phone lockers or Yondr pouches for the whole school day, so that students can pay attention to their teachers and to each other)

4. More independence, free play, and responsibility in the real world. """

https://www.afterbabel.com/i/143412349/what-now

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#239

Post by bigstrat2003 »

lvoudour wrote: post #202
hackerlight wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you don't like these products and feel they are negative, then don't use them. Relevant bit from the essay: "But much of my book is about the collective action traps that entire communities of adolescents fall into when they move their social lives onto these platforms, such that it becomes costly to abstain. It is at that point that collective mental health declines most sharply, and the individuals who try to…

An excellent point. Abstention = social isolation, which for young people is far worse than exposure. Restricting your children's access is not an option (lets' be real, they'll find a way to circumvent your efforts anyway) and moving the burden of restriction from society to individuals is not fair. So as a society do we let unrestrained exposure or do we take collective action? I lean on the second option, but I'm…

> Abstention = social isolation, which for young people is far worse than exposure. Restricting your children's access is not an option...

"Everybody else is doing it" has never been, and still is not, a valid reason for anything. If other parents choose to let their kids ingest mental poison, that does not mean that one should allow their children to do the same. Abstention is not only an option, it is something which absolutely should be enforced by any parent who cares about their child's well being.

Re: Yes, social media is a cause of the epidemic of teenage mental illness

#240

Post by eviks »

Capricorn2481 wrote: post #230
ImPleadThe5th wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While both paternalism. Requiring safety features on a saw does not restrict free speech. It's more akin to seatbelt laws. It's also made to protect everyone who uses a table saw and not just children. Imo, I do think social media needs to be reeled in by policy. But I can see why it makes people uncomfortable and why there is a difference with the saw.

How does not having social media restrict free speech? Do you think free speech didn't exist before social media? Arguably, the presence of social media homogenizes the speech we're allowed to have.

It restricts free speech in the most direct, literal sense - by... restricting your ability to freely speak.

The historical existence is simply irrelevant. Just like existence of pre-TV/newspaper speech is not a relevant factor in determining whether banning all TV/newspapers in 1950 restricts free speech

Post reply on HN