| > There are now enough statistics to prove that social media has a negative impact on the mental health of users Yes, but the point of the article is compared to what. I feel negative after 15 minutes on twitter (depending on the topic, of course), but I feel far less negative than if I'd tried getting similar info from legacy sources (10x slower, and with 10x the suits, lipstick, and ads). The point isn't that social media are supposed to make users feel good, but that they're important information tools - a window to the world - and the alternatives - ignorance or less diverse more bloated sources - aren't the answer. The solution isn't banning; it's the same as what we do with every single other useful but potentially dangerous thing: fires, pools, beaches.. - education. Perhaps secondary school could have modules for how to responsibly use social media, set and manage expectations/anxiety, when to use it (some people recommend not before sleep etc). Banning only removes upside and delays downside. Education lessens/removes downside altogether with full upside. |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernormal_stimulus
It is broadly accepted that you cannot educate a toddler or even young child to expect them to be able to self control all the time due to lack of brain development (frontal cortex or what have you).
But what if a significant portion or maybe even all humans’ brains never get to the point where all supernormal stimuli can be educated against, and it is just an inherent mechanical weakness?