He doesn’t argue that the behaviours aren’t harmful at all but rather often manifest as a coping mechanism for another condition. He thinks it’s a dangerous idea to treat social media addiction as something to treat directly rather than something that likely indicates another problem. I don’t think it’s perfect because actual addictions are often caused by other problems (ex. Depression). I really wish the expert was forced to answer questions like whether it’s worthwhile to treat alcohol addiction directly without treating an underlying depression. It seems like this definition may not quite work the way he wants it to. The distinction may be if you treat the depression directly the social media addiction disappears but if you treat the depression directly the alcoholism still needs to be dealt with.