Or just don't let them use it. A lot of verbiage there; no reason to let your child use social media. I wonder if they've been lobbied.
That said, it sure seems like social media companies got this to be as neutral as they possibly could, considering the very strong evidence that social media is extremely bad for kids. We’re definitely soft rebooting the tobacco experience, this time with psychology instead of lungs.
At a higher level, short video content has become a super refined version of americas funniest home videos and mtv. There is no narrative between videos, and it just constantly presses the dopamine button.
Then you get the split videos where you have a sensory video playing alongside someone talking.
It also doesn't talk about faux excitement. Every other youtuber that isnt Miss Rachel is yelling or screaming, and basically producing entire videos of hysterical feigning of shock, mouth agasp. That transcends nearly any topic.
It also doesnt talk about learning to navigate youtube vs being fed youtube by youtube.
It also doesnt talk about advertising, especially the organicish kind. Teaching kids that the video about a guy making pancakes with Prime is a Prime ad.
It also doesnt talk about replacing friends with celebrities.
It might help the mental health of the parents, and increase interaction with their children, if they cut back on their social media use themselves. It would definitely serve as a good example. (I realize I'm saying this via a social media channel while being a father. I get that it's not easy. I am also aware I'm committing hypocrisy.)
My wife and I promised each other not to "share" much (and absolutely no photos) about our child on the Internet (even as the child, getting older, has started asking us to "share" things). I think not being able to use my child for sweet, sweet Internet points was useful in helping me disengage from the least rewarding, most mentally taxing social media (which, for me, was Facebook).
I caught myself replying HN comments during evening read aloud time. I decided to start using the dedicated e-reader, instead of my phone, so that it won't happen again.
It isn't like how it was 20 or even 10 years ago, blanket banning will leave them significantly socially isolated and stunted. IME anyone over the age of 25 will not fully appreciate this unless they regularly interact with and (critically!) actively listen to what kids have to say.
> blanket banning will leave them significantly socially isolated
If they get that much of their interaction online, they're already socially isolated. That it happens to be called social media doesn't mean it's actually social.
Government does have a place here, but it's in the form of banning hyperoptimizing attention/advertising algorithms and other business models that rely on precision crafted human manipulation, not micromanaging as a parental stand-in.
> the War on Drugs
That's not a one-dimensional topic, and in the case of social media, the suppliers are very, very well known.
We can make them leper colonies filled with screens with up-arrows to click on.
I would assume that in 2023, phones are a key tool for most adults' satisfied lives too.
I’m happy to take the downvotes caused by leaving off the /s!
Newer parents have had the benefit of hindsight and got to see firsthand how fucked places like Facebook can be.
But I'm not sure what the national trend is.
Telling kids today to stay completely off their phones seems even more futile. There's commenters mystified that kids "can't live without their phones"...Well, what do they learn when they are surrounded by adults who literally depend on their phones to live? How many of us are making plans with our own friends without one?
My group of school friends would talk in person at school and then hop on a Call of Duty lobby when they got home, or chat on Facebook/SMS. Without internet or a cell phone, I was only present for a small portion of the their conversations and activities. Someone might post something funny or shocking on Facebook and everyone would be talking about it at school the next day. Sometimes people would continue a conversation that had started online the night before, and I had to either sit quietly or ask someone to fill me in (with mixed results). The result of all this is that I never quite formed bonds with that group, I was always on the periphery, the guy who hung out with them at school.
I assume all of that is more intense today than it was circa 2010.
The "keep your kids off social media" advice only works if a lot of other parents do the same, and if you live in an area where kids can easily visit each other in person.
Have some good memories but all in all that time could have been spent more productively in hindsight.
Chicken? or egg?
This is definitely true. But we ought to also consider the risk that tech is creating socially anxious individuals. Some of those kids, if they interacted more in-person and spent less time alone, would eventually find like-minded friends to hang out with.
It's nowhere near that simple unless you're living with the Amish. No social media results in isolation from peers, a cure worse than the disease.
Pre-social-media I grew up with no TV, only Christian music, limited movies and a whole host of other things that isolated me from my peers. It didn't do anything but build resentment towards my parents and make me thankful they have no say in my life anymore.
I don't now the best approach with kids these days since I don't have any. But I strongly doubt it's the "strict no" route.
Worst case, they’ll be no worse off than those of us who came of age before social media existed.
But I'm largely with you. As a practical matter, it's easier just to avoid it entirely.
Friends live far away? Organize with other parents to drive kids back and forth, or go home together from school. You live in SFZ suburbia? Well, that requires a more drastic change but it's doable.
Social media is addicting in large part because kids are addicted to each other. It's often used as a substitute for hanging out. That barrier doesn't need to be there all the time. Adults get complacent with tech and will bias towards the convenience of staying at home versus going out-into-the-world to do things - if we want to lead by example, changing our own lifestyle helps, but simply accommodating a kid's extra-curriculars will get you out of the house too.
And really, if you prevent a kid from watching 3 hours of television, are they going to do "nothing" instead? No, they'll figure something out to keep entertained. By the same token, they'll want to satisfy their social needs.
One problem is that opting for online chat can be a defense mechanism against going out and being vulnerable in front of other people.
I think it's just an objective fact: given the way social media sites intentionally try to grab and hold onto our attention at any cost, the cons far outweigh the pros and we all (not just children) would be better off consuming less social media. Once the media companies restructure their business model and make their platforms more ethical and sustainable for society, then I have no problem with widespread adoption again.
https://www.businessinsider.com/tech-execs-screen-time-child...
It's a judgement call.
And social media is less harmful than some traditional ones. It's just that you've been conditioned by the traditional ones to believe they are somehow normal.