[TheOtherHobbes]

This is like arguing that the fast food industries, the sugar industry, and the ad industries have no role to play in diabetes because it's your fault you can't control yourself.

Never mind that you will have been exposed to tens of thousands of hours of literal behaviour modification programming. You should somehow magically still have the personal, emotional, and cultural resources to override it. And if you don't - it's your fault.

But curiously it's not the fault of the corporations, because there is no equivalent requirement on them to control themselves, or to take corporate-personal responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

[blueterminal]

How would you try to help an alcoholic? Would you tell him that it's alcohol producers' who is at fault? Or would you tell him to try and get help? Why would an advice be different for over-consumption of social media, coke, big macs, tv shows, casinos etc.?

[mthoms]

The answer to that is extraordinarily complex, and dependent on the abusers' history and personal circumstance so it's not really answerable here.

Cigarettes might be a more apt analogy IMHO. It's extraordinarily hard to quit, but at least we've come to a point where there is enormous social pressure to do so. And not just for health reasons: it's widely considered an unattractive habit.

Contrast that with the 50's where it was not only accepted by society but considered "glamorous". That's (sort of) where social media is today. Its image needs to go from fun and youthful to gross and harmful in the popular perception (barring that, the entire model needs to be re-invented).

Educating people on the long-term harms is the primary (perhaps only?) way forward at this point. This movie does that very well but it will be a long slog.

I'm not even sure this war can be won, but we must try.

[klyrs]

That's weird framing. The individual needs help, but there are significant regulations on alcohol companies, too. We went too far, by prohibiting it altogether, but we still limit alcohol advertising, we have age limits, etc. None of that is "telling him" to blame the alcohol producers; we need both regulations against harms facilitated by corporations for profit and support for those harmed.

[save_ferris]

> Why would an advice be different for over-consumption of social media, coke, big macs, tv shows, casinos etc.?

Of course, different people deal with these kinds of issues differently, but it's also important to recognize the vast differences between consuming too much alcohol vs consuming too much tv. Firstly, if you've spent any significant amount of time around a recovering alcoholic and discussed the issue openly with them, you realize pretty quickly that it's usually not just a raw craving. A lot of alcoholics drink in response to trauma of various kinds, and your backstory as an alcoholic plays a fairly significant role in how to seek the best recovery strategy. There isn't a one-size-fits-all solution there.

TV is much different for several reasons. First, there's not a universal societal acknowledgement that TV is addictive like alcohol. The US went through prohibition because alcoholism was rampant in society, TV hasn't disrupted society in the same way. That's not to say that TV isn't addictive or capable of being abused, it's simply that TV is much more passive in terms of how it's consumed, and it's higher order effects on people who consume too much. This is also true of social media.

Social media and TV don't usually force people between feeding their families or consuming endlessly the way that alcohol did in the 19th century, but it does encourage us to spend more time on autopilot and less time consciously thinking and being present.

I highly recommend David Foster Wallace's talks on entertainment addiction[0]. He predicted the genesis of a lot of these issues 20 years ago, and his commentary is still so relevant today, years after his death.

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoAME7gPBaw

[mikeshank]

There are four trillion bits coming at you, 99% of them are shit

[multiplegeorges]

Not a great comparison, since if alcohol were invented today I'd expect it to be banned or at least much more tightly control. It is incredibly damaging to society and we only tolerate it for historical reasons.

[lentil_soup]

all those examples you listed have restrictions and regulations in many places in addition to services that provide help to the affected. Doesn't have to be one OR the other, can do both

[bonoboTP]

> How would you try to help an alcoholic?

That's a distinct question from "How would you try to reduce the prevalence of alcoholism in your country?".

When considering a particular individual, yes you need to get them medical and therapeutic help, some kind of life coaching/counseling program etc.

When considering the whole population, you do need to think about regulation of selling, advertising, public health campaigns for prevention etc.

Similar with sugary junk food. You can tax it at higher levels, ban advertising to children etc. Be strict on forbidding misleading claims. Perhaps pub highly visible "high sugar content" warnings on the product etc.

Yes, all this stuff is very un-American and too "socialist" I guess, which leaves you with the other option of being the most obese developed nation and having a substantial proportion of people be obese at a level of it becoming a legit disability. Which is fine for most people I guess, because it's not themselves, so who cares about other people anyway.