U.S. Teens Spend Average of 4.8 Hours on Social Media per Day
news.gallup.com
news.gallup.com
upvotes article on hacker news
HN is like that a lot of times. Especially when it's considering salary, social welfare, health insurance etc.
Just read any topic about open source funding.
I went through a period of social isolation and HN was an escape. OPs and commenters became the closest thing to peers that I had. Those peers were consistently perceived as smarter and more motivated than me, and my already poor self esteem continued to decline.
Now that I'm working full-time onsite again, the bar set by my physical peers is much more achievable than what folks on HN acheive.
HN might be better than tiktok, but 5 hours a day of either is bad for your soul. Physically being around and working with others is vital to most people's mental health, even introverts like me that feel like avoidance is the most appealing path.
Tangentially - if you struggle with feelings that point you in directions you know are bad, be very careful if you engage with the mental healthcare system.
Some examples of possible offenders in HN favorite topics: discussions of inflation, discussions of housing shortage, discussions of government and their policy, discussions of big tech and the possibly harmful things big tech does, discussions of basically anything about crypto, web3, or metaverse, discussions about censorship, the list goes on
If you look in the comment threads for these topics you see the signs of unhealthy relationship with social media. Highly emotional and inflammatory arguments with total internet strangers
Was that any different? I'd find it hard to believe GNU/Linux vs Linux or Slackware vd Red Hat Linux was worth any more than random dancing or makeup tutorials.
It's the same on the other side. There's a massive difference between watching a random dance and using that video to learn that dance.
-- Nathaniel Borenstein
That is of course a far stretch, but I would argue that your argument is too. Non-complicit workers might have just lost their jobs and would have been replaced with complicit ones and the bomb would still be dropped.
For this to make sense I think it's important to look at the distribution of power really. Considering the power of the people who order the bombs and factory workers not really having a leaver I don't think their actions make a difference.
And I'm not claiming superiority; I just don't feign to be above those who spend their time on TikTok.
We know that reading is correlated to all kinds of positive things. For example: success, improved brain function, memory and mood. If you read and write a lot on social media maybe you get at least some part of that benefit.
Whereas, we're pretty sure you don't get any of those benefits from swiping and watching. But we do know that social media overall is correlated to the INVERSE of a bunch of those good things. It's correlated to worse cognitive abilities, worse memory, depression and anxiety!
And the most studied of the passive watching experiences (TV) is correlated to negative stuff too.
So frankly - replacing a reading habit with Tiktok (exactly what the nation's teens have done over time) is almost certainly unhealthy.
Edit: Reading (specifically the studies I'm aware of specify reading books and possessing high reading comprehension, but maybe other forms too) is correlated to better critical thinking, too. How much of the rise of fake news is attributable to the fact that we stopped reading?
It includes YouTube as social media, which accounts for 2 hours of the 4.8 hours. I’m pretty sure video games and TV used as much if not more prior to YouTube existing.
I don't use any 'social media', but I do enjoy watching YouTube.
YouTube is the only/primary video streaming subscription I have. I don't have a traditional TV/cable subscription, instead I stream YT to my TV.
So, I think I also average about 2 hours if YT viewing a day. But I don't agree that that should be counted as 'social media' use.
That I think is the real distinction. But if you're in the comments section of YouTube then I think it should count as social media; so in your scenario I agree it doesn't.
My teens: 4-5 hours per day, mostly social media & tv/movies.
My wife: 5 hours per day, 90% productivity.
Me: 2 hours per day, 75% social media, streaming tv & news.
The amazing part is my wife also clocks 6+ hours on her PC but still gets an amazing amount of work done on her tiny iPhone (SE!)
(I get what you mean, but I think it's an important distinction that is often left out)
That's not a bad start. Overexposure is literally giving users dementia, aka brain atrophy.
eta: if anyone was spending 4.8 hours a day playing the slots, we'd call that a serious addiction, let alone kids whose brains are still forming.
Genuine question: Are there any studies/etc showing this? If there are, why aren’t they the focus of articles like this?
My guess would be that the sample size here is small and therefore it's not a completely iron clad study. Maybe there are bigger studies out there, I don't know. This one would be easy to gainsay and/or maybe the publication doesn't think its readers respond to scientific research.
I guess this is like the early days of research showing smoking was bad. Long way to go until everyone is convinced.
There is plenty of material that children lack the tools to understand and digest without trauma or ideological absorption. Most adults lack those skills too, to be fair.
There should actually be ways to choose for your children what kinds of content you would like them to have access to until they're mature enough to decide for themselves. If you want to limit it to educational content, that's up to you as a parent.
Is antisemitism radical ? Are islamists radical ? Who knows right ? Such a tough question!
Radical means favoring extreme changes. So depending on where you live and in what part of society the things you mentioned above might not be seen as radical or they might be.
I for example would have liked to not give children access to a bible too. That might be seen as radical in some christian societies...
> do we agree with this authoritarianism?
Yes? Do you agree with your kids getting blasted/manipulated by foreign content coming from an app controlled by an authoritarian country ?
Why do you want more authoritarians?
Why do you want foreign apps made by authoritarian countries to have root access to your kids brains ?
> Why do you want more authoritarians?
> Why do people want the government to solve all problems?
I know it's 2023 and people believe "laws = authoritarianism" but come on. We decided to live in organised and hierarchical societies for a reason, and the reason isn't "I want to do whatever I want whenever I went even if it's detrimental to myself and my community"
In fact, I believe the level of laws a society has should be negotiated by its citizens. I prefer a more liberal society, but that does not mean I do not want laws.
The question to be debated is just how much power a government should have. Personally I would prefer that parents and their community determine what is right for a child to be exposed to instead of a top-down approach, but there is a lot of grey area there and must be negotiated culturally and politically.
What I do fear is that authoritarians rarely give up authority once given, and once given enough authority the populace's ability to negotiate government's role in their life democratically evaporates. Increasingly despotic leaders seek the power the government now holds.
The history of the 20th century shows this in extreme forms in the likes of Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, etc.
Especially in the case of Germany - Hilter was elected! - the people wanted his authority because he promised to fix Germany, promised to fix the morals of their society.
I see parallels in legislating morality, or the attitude that government _should_ legislate every moral or social quandary.
Anyway, I'd encourage you to steel-man your opponents ideas instead of assuming the most ridiculous, easily-defeated idea of it.
Can you really not understand why some people favor authoritarian systems? Can you not imagine that some folks just don't want think critically themselves? Live is often dull but easy if you follow along in authoritarian systems. Some people prefer that
Is heroin being illegal authoritarianism?
Crystal meth?
It is clear by now that social media are terrible for the individual, and for society. And so much more for kids.
Is the problem that people enjoy passive entertainment? Young as well as old?
Is the problem the source of the predigested pap that makes up the entertainment? It was all fine when it was only 4 sources and no interactivity?
The overall amount of time adolescents spend on passive screen entertainment has increased dramatically in our lifetimes, especially in the last decade. It has come at the expense of books and reading (as well as other things). There is lots of data out there.
Is social media like TV, but worse? I think that is the question.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6198586/
"Cultivation theory proposes that those who spend more time “living” in the virtual world of television may perceive the “real world” as per the imagery, principles, and portrayals depicted on the small screen. People who spend a lot of time watching television are likely to assume a television worldview of mental illness."
And https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32713607/
"TV time is associated with numerous adverse health outcomes. Future guidelines could suggest limiting TV time to less than 2 hours per day to reduce most of the associated adverse health events."
I'm trying to point out that the entire question is a repeat of a false frame propaganda sermon that has been repeated time and time again.
The problem with these types of articles is they are simply fixtures that print media companies publish every year, recycle the same decades-old talking points, and add very little insight.
I am truly amazed to watch my generation (GenX) read these articles and react to it like it is new or newsworthy.
The least we could do is elevate the conversation or begin to ask questions like: Are video games better than passive entertainment? How can we best engage and challenge young minds with technology so we can equip them with the mental faculties to thrive into adulthood? How do we help them disengage and quiet their minds so they can focus or meditate?
It's like saying alcohol and heroin are the same because "drug"
Today: unlimited stream of shit coming from an unlimited number of sources, everything is 2-10s long which destroy your attention span. People competing to trigger your primal needs, everything slowly evolve into softcore porn, the rest is disguised advertising. Look at what's trending on tiktok and ig, it's scary
Its also much sticker, constant notifications, algorithms built around keeping your eyes glued to an app, dopamine rewards for engaging with content.
I don't deny that less time is likely being spent on TV than older generations and I also don't pretend that TV didn't manipulate people into watching more ads, spending money, etc. But I think there is a huge generational miscalculation about the dangers of Social media vs older slower media.
Among other things mass media like TV promote a shared cultural identity. You can argue that shared cultural identity is a good or bad thing, but it’s a different thing than you get from social media.
On the flip side TV isn’t going to improve your typing skills.
Bonus points for every wave's denouncers having to ignore all the details like "what are they reading" in order to tar an entire economic sector with the same brush. Seems to be a requirement for the form.
Is playing a puzzle game with a group the same "social media" as mindlessly staring at a tiktok stream for the same time period? Was reading a daily newspaper for the stock prices the same as "being informed" of the 1860's equivalents of Bat Boy and Aliens Ate My Husband?
From a relevant study (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7044619/). GMV = Gray Matter Volume. Your brain, basically.
"This study investigated fronto-cingulate gray matter abnormalities in problematic smartphone users, particularly those who spend time on social networking platforms. [...]
Problematic smartphone users had significantly smaller GMV in the right lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) than healthy controls, and there were significant negative correlations between GMV in the right lateral OFC and the Smartphone Addiction Proneness Scale (SAPS) score, including the SAPS tolerance subscale. [...]
These results suggest that lateral orbitofrontal gray matter abnormalities are implicated in problematic smartphone use, especially in social networking platform overuse."