Eh, there is sufficient evidence to recommend children and teenagers having limited internet and social media access during their formative years at this point.
The tiktok algorithm of mindless doomscrolling funny little bits all short and digestible for a decaying attention span is just the most egregious example why restrictions should at least be considered.
You could say that about a lot of things, though. Video games and TV were commonly criticized this way. And it was a popular meme on Reddit that people would be so addicted to the site that they’d spend hours scrolling it.
Criticizing tik tok is just popular on sites like this because people here really don’t like tik tok.
At any rate, parents can already try to restrict their children’s access. But governments are gonna have a hard time doing so without hurting everyone as a whole (eg, see the attempts of some US states to require giving your ID to porn sites). Dunno if you remember being a kid, but I found my way around every restriction my parents set and I just disliked them for it.
You realize that’s still true, right? You’re posting this as some big own as though it’s somehow not harmful to mindlessly consume any form of media to an extreme extent, especially in the learning years.
I’m not saying it isn’t true. I’ve never used TikTok, Instagram, and avoid YouTube shorts. I saw some articles about “TikTok Brain” making their way across the internet yesterday and I wanted to call out the hypocrisy.
How is it hypocrisy if the previous forms of media were also bad for you, Tik-Tok is just more efficient at funneling meaningless drivel down your throat?
Exactly. We’ve also been saying that burning coal was destroying the climate, and then we said CFCs were destroying the ozone, and then we said massive deforestation is ruining the climate…doesn’t make any of them less true just because we’ve said similar beings about less efficient means of destruction.
Such generalizing statements are blatantly untrue, hypocritical, and harmful. People don’t use social media without a reason. Everything a human does is meet their needs, both psychological and physiological. When humans resort to social media it means they resort to social interaction and whatever other needs they may have like having feelings validated, visual/audio/etc. stimulation, but that doesn’t sound sensational enough, that’s not enough to scapegoat a group of people
Ok but research indicates that it fails to actually meet their long-term needs. This is actually a really confusing take, if humans always do what meets their needs then we wouldn’t have any issues at all? We TRY to do what we think will meet them, but we’re often mistaken, and this is an example of that.
Did I say that it does meet needs long term? What was the sample? What was the methodology? What communities were they participating in? How were they participating? What were the needs? Did they have a neurodivergency? What were their surroundings like? What was their childhood like? Do they go to therapy? What therapeutic practice did they do in therapy?
Why are you asking like I was talking about a single person? Like… “What therapeutic practice did they do in therapy?”? Is this your idea of a counterargument?
Also no. Addiction happens exactly when the needs are met more than usual, hence “social media addiction”, and it’s not the social media’s fault, it’s not “TikTok Instagram bad”. It’s weaponized misconceptions about mental health that are creating this issue in the first place
I think its hypocritical for a generation to consider the baseline media technology at the time of their upbringing to be generally acceptable, only to turn around and declare the next media technology to be unacceptable for their children.
I think that’s generally a good argument, however the rate and level of dopamine hits from TikTok and YouTube Shorts may far surpass that of prior mediums and so actually warrant additional considerations and precautions.
Thanks! I agree with you, I just think that each technological leap up to this point has caused the level of dopamine hits to greatly surpass the prior medium (hence the viral adoption). But young brains seem to accept the new baseline and then the cycle repeats.
When I was growing up I was bombarded with articles from older people telling me how bad video games were for my attention span, how they would increase my proclivity for violence, etc. This did not prevent me from enjoying them immensely, making friends because of them, and eventually leading me to a fun career in computer science.
I suspect that will be the case with each new medium.
It may be hypocritical, but have you considered that all of these forms of entertainment are unhealthy? The only difference is that they get more and more efficient with each generation, causing increasing levels of concern from each generation. That’s indicative of a rising trend
@STUPIDVIPGUY@aCosmicWave I’m trying and eliminating are sources of entertainment from these websites since the saturation of entertainment content is much more than educational ones now.
What situations your short attention span makes uncomfortable for you apart from things related to some sort of achievement (as perceived by your workplace, school, family, friends, etc)
Eh, there is sufficient evidence to recommend children and teenagers having limited internet and social media access during their formative years at this point.
The tiktok algorithm of mindless doomscrolling funny little bits all short and digestible for a decaying attention span is just the most egregious example why restrictions should at least be considered.
You could say that about a lot of things, though. Video games and TV were commonly criticized this way. And it was a popular meme on Reddit that people would be so addicted to the site that they’d spend hours scrolling it.
Criticizing tik tok is just popular on sites like this because people here really don’t like tik tok.
At any rate, parents can already try to restrict their children’s access. But governments are gonna have a hard time doing so without hurting everyone as a whole (eg, see the attempts of some US states to require giving your ID to porn sites). Dunno if you remember being a kid, but I found my way around every restriction my parents set and I just disliked them for it.
Red Dead Redepmption 2 is not a video game.
“That’s not a game at all. That’s like fucking Shakespeare.”
-Tenacious D
Apparently there was enough evidence to recommend children and teenagers to have limited access to the radio as well.
You realize that’s still true, right? You’re posting this as some big own as though it’s somehow not harmful to mindlessly consume any form of media to an extreme extent, especially in the learning years.
Somebody been watching too many tik toks?
What a ridiculous logical leap.
Erm ackchually it’s called an insult and it wasn’t meant to convey a logical point
I’m not saying it isn’t true. I’ve never used TikTok, Instagram, and avoid YouTube shorts. I saw some articles about “TikTok Brain” making their way across the internet yesterday and I wanted to call out the hypocrisy.
How is it hypocrisy if the previous forms of media were also bad for you, Tik-Tok is just more efficient at funneling meaningless drivel down your throat?
Exactly. We’ve also been saying that burning coal was destroying the climate, and then we said CFCs were destroying the ozone, and then we said massive deforestation is ruining the climate…doesn’t make any of them less true just because we’ve said similar beings about less efficient means of destruction.
Such generalizing statements are blatantly untrue, hypocritical, and harmful. People don’t use social media without a reason. Everything a human does is meet their needs, both psychological and physiological. When humans resort to social media it means they resort to social interaction and whatever other needs they may have like having feelings validated, visual/audio/etc. stimulation, but that doesn’t sound sensational enough, that’s not enough to scapegoat a group of people
Ok but research indicates that it fails to actually meet their long-term needs. This is actually a really confusing take, if humans always do what meets their needs then we wouldn’t have any issues at all? We TRY to do what we think will meet them, but we’re often mistaken, and this is an example of that.
Did I say that it does meet needs long term? What was the sample? What was the methodology? What communities were they participating in? How were they participating? What were the needs? Did they have a neurodivergency? What were their surroundings like? What was their childhood like? Do they go to therapy? What therapeutic practice did they do in therapy?
Why are you asking like I was talking about a single person? Like… “What therapeutic practice did they do in therapy?”? Is this your idea of a counterargument?
Also no. Addiction happens exactly when the needs are met more than usual, hence “social media addiction”, and it’s not the social media’s fault, it’s not “TikTok Instagram bad”. It’s weaponized misconceptions about mental health that are creating this issue in the first place
Edit: PSA - more than usual does not mean enough
I think its hypocritical for a generation to consider the baseline media technology at the time of their upbringing to be generally acceptable, only to turn around and declare the next media technology to be unacceptable for their children.
I think that’s generally a good argument, however the rate and level of dopamine hits from TikTok and YouTube Shorts may far surpass that of prior mediums and so actually warrant additional considerations and precautions.
But then, I may just be an old man.
Do you know anything about the reward system and addiction apart from the words “serotonin” and “dopamine”? /gen
Thanks! I agree with you, I just think that each technological leap up to this point has caused the level of dopamine hits to greatly surpass the prior medium (hence the viral adoption). But young brains seem to accept the new baseline and then the cycle repeats.
When I was growing up I was bombarded with articles from older people telling me how bad video games were for my attention span, how they would increase my proclivity for violence, etc. This did not prevent me from enjoying them immensely, making friends because of them, and eventually leading me to a fun career in computer science.
I suspect that will be the case with each new medium.
Video games are interactive, not passive. You can learn a lot and sharpen your reflexes, but moderation is still key.
It may be hypocritical, but have you considered that all of these forms of entertainment are unhealthy? The only difference is that they get more and more efficient with each generation, causing increasing levels of concern from each generation. That’s indicative of a rising trend
This is a rather interesting viewpoint and I can’t really find any fault with it.
It’s mine as well, I think it has a decent chance of being right.
@STUPIDVIPGUY @aCosmicWave I’m trying and eliminating are sources of entertainment from these websites since the saturation of entertainment content is much more than educational ones now.
Fwiw I actively believe that reddit is responsible for shortening my attention span.
It is not hypocritical to call out tik tok for doing the same.
What situations your short attention span makes uncomfortable for you apart from things related to some sort of achievement (as perceived by your workplace, school, family, friends, etc)
Can you rephrase your question? Imo nearly everything can be interpreted to relate to some sort of achievement.
The media technologies are not comparable, thats where your argument falls apart.
What if I found the type content that my generation absorbed to be a problem as well?
“I’m not saying it’s true I just wanted to imply it’s true to drive
enragementengagement”