It's certainly a stretch to describe that as killing people. You can argue it's a an acceptable stretch, or that it's still very bad even if described more accurately, but it is plainly not what 'killing people' traditionally means
Yes, it is. Anything with a wide userbase that worsens or even just intensifies mood will lead to elevated suicide rates. If your boss picks someone else for the promotion and you kill yourself over it, your boss didn't kill you. If you're attracted to someone and they marry someone else and you respond similarly, same answer. If your instagram friends post pictures of their happy lives and it makes you feel bad, etc.
You can broaden the definition of 'killing people' to include 'elevating their risk of killing themselves', but then you have to shed the intuitions that are the sole purpose of using that kind of language in the first place. It's a rhetorical sleight of hand.
We have decades of research now showing concretely the harmful effects of social media, especially for people under 18. It is not debatable. It directly harms broader society and individuals yet we continue to have incredibly thin regulations that are barely enforced.
Help me out here. This has been happening to me a lot lately and I have to assume it's a failure to communicate on my part. I only intended to dispute that this should be called 'killing people'. I tried to indicate that I still think it's bad even if not described in that way.
Is there something that I said or failed to say that lead you to believe otherwise, or are you intending this reply as an argument that it should be called 'killing people' in a way I'm not understanding?
And here I thought the internet was about the free exchange of ideas and knowledge. And free will was the ability to choose to use social media or not.
I don’t know why you’re getting sarcastic with me. I also imagine you’re aware of the addiction element but if not I can send some studies/research along.
Social media companies have decades of work and billions of dollars of research to pull from. They use every single trick and tool they can to make it an addiction. The dialogue and shared strategies between them and the gambling industry is enough of a red flag on its own IMO.
It’s not a fair fight. Asking someone to just stop using social media can be like telling a gambling addict to just stop gambling. You’re also expecting teenagers to exhibit that self control.
And I’m not even getting into how critical it is to use social media if you run a business. Hell at some companies you’re required to participate in their social media presence. You can’t simply make it go away. You may as well tell people to just stop buying a phone or a computer.
I mean I work in tech. I’m 39. I’ve been on social media my entire life. At one point I was addicted. I cut social media down to 3 hours a week now I’ve taken years off in the past. I’ve also beaten alcohol addiction after the loss of my son. I’ve also quit gaming because I couldn’t balance it. Should we ban gaming? Should we ban marketing? Billboards? I see booze everywhere and yet no one is saying people with alcohol addictions are harmed by these ads.
I understand the psychology of marketing and what these companies do to exploit that.
At the end of the day if it’s about the kids. The parents should be educated at this point.
When I was a “tween” I was building CGI blogs and myspacing before moving from Perl to PHP; in high school you needed a college email address to sign up for Facebook so that didn’t come for until after I graduated high school in 2004.
Sure things have changed but I find if I pause and reflect daily and stay in the moment I don’t ever doom scroll or need social media.
Even now this comment is only being written bc I’m taking a poo.
