I often get preached at about how bad social media is. The irony is that I don't have any, and the people preaching at me do.
My best theory: I suspect both online and offline, people "parrot" ideas 90% of the time. They hear an idea, repeat it without much thought, if it resonates well they repeat it more.
I think the reason people do this in-person is the same as they do it online. They say things not because they have deeply reflected on all the ramifications and sincerely believe and live by those ideas. They say things "to get likes."
This is a completely fresh perspective to me and I find it very interesting, there's a good chance that you're right.
I believe there is some dark psychology behind all of this. I think we test each other not only on how virtuous we are, but in what ways we are morally deficient. Being addicted to social media is one way we give ourselves permission to indulge in types of negative behavior that existed long before computers existed. These kind of articles are a tacit justification of those behaviors.
"As I explain in my book..."
This is advertising.
It's enough to be valid, or thought provoking.
Because surely that's not the case with 95% of what's posted on HN, and that's not a bad thing.
No, sorry, beating a dead horse still isn’t justified.
You otoh offer nothing of substance
I agree in a mundane sense, repetition is not exciting, but the sorts of large scale messages such as this one, need to be repeated across many sources of information (has Sci Am ever run an article in this before? Not the same as if Huff Post does) before it's taken seriously enough, by enough people, for something to change.