https://www.honest-broker.com/p/30-of-children-ages-5-7-are-on-tiktok?publication_id=296132&post_id=144077478&isFreemail=true&r=1t09w3&triedRedirect=true
And why did youth mental health problems accelerate after 2010?
My brief forays into both TikTok and YouTube Shorts have left me profoundly unimpressed with the short-form video.
It’s all vertical video as well. YouTube pushes Shorts fairly aggressively on the desktop website, and it’s a crappy experience.
Be glad Youtube still works on the desktop at all. A very large majority of users watch on their phones and YouTube only cares about profits.
I already knew this but still what a terrifying prospect, I love my phone but there are some things a desktop is just better for
Yeah I'm one of the ten people who can't stand watching videos on my phone. I draw the line at gifs.
I'll do football film on iPad or desktop. I'll very occasionally do a video class format on one of those. That's it. Anything else is going on a TV.
Games I love handheld, though, so IDK.
I tend to watch YouTube on my phone while traveling, waiting, relaxing and don’t feel like turning on the TV… but always in landscape orientation. I can’t stand vertical videos.
Literally proven to ruin attention span in children and essentially cause ADHD, can also easily cause depression by constantly seeing (usually) fake people flaunting their (usually) fake life and wealth.
Not to mention the proliferation of insane conspiracy theories, absolute nonsense and usually harmful 'advice' of one kind or another, 'being rich is the only thing that matters so here is a scam to show you how!' of all kinds of flavors...
Brain rot.
Literally proven to ruin attention span in children and essentially cause ADHD
Please link source, interested in reading.
Having recently been diagnosed with ADHD I've taken part in several classes on ADHD to learn more about it. And the consensus is that no external factors like that cause ADHD. However, I'm sure this topic of algorithm driven addictive short form videos for a very young audience is being studied more now than ever so who knows what the consensus on that will be in the future. Causing ADHD or not, I don't think it's healthy either way.
Yeah it can certainly cause problems, it's just not ADHD.
ADHD doesn't even really mean short attention spans, it's more of the inability to willingly direct attention. It's the same way people incorrectly use "OCD" to mean liking things clean and/or orderly.
I have ADHD and I've had times where I've done the same thing for 14 hours straight (even forgetting to eat) when my brain decides it wants to latch onto that thing. You just need to be sufficiently stimulated, hence why stimulants can work as a treatment.
ADHD doesn't even really mean short attention spans, it's more of the inability to willingly direct attention. It's the same way people incorrectly use "OCD" to mean liking things clean and/or orderly.
Both of these are the product of needing constant stimulation. I understand your point that hyper-focus is also part of ADD/ADHD, and I certainly am not going to make claims about how your brain is changing structurally without evidence behind it.
So this is mere conjecture for a mechanism:
What these apps (with short format video being the worst) do is train your brain to expect a constant stream of dopamine hits. Novelty (presumably even trash novelty like TikTok) triggers dopamine, your brain becomes dependent on that steady stream of dopamine fix, and your body starts craving it once you remove that pattern of behavior.
This is very similar to ADHD, which is also strongly connected to problems with how dopamine is regulated. It's not as simple as just not enough dopamine or poor uptake or whatever, but it's reasonably clear that it plays a role.
So both cases are a result of poor dopamine regulation causing a need for stimulation that has a negative impact on ability to function from day to day. They're probably at minimum relatively similar.
This is my understanding of it all as well. Like, if your parents never stfu as a kid or you never had a chance to really be alone and quiet and safe as a baby, your brain, your very concept of self, is hardwired for constant stimulation such that it's uncomfortable not to have it, to the point of sitting their for 14 hours reading Wikipedia pages or whatever because it's more stimulating that it would be to stop and wash the floors or so the laundry, or maybe just talking your fingers in class or letting your mind read every sign and bumper sticker while you're driving. It's also why all the most effective treatments are about emotional regulation.
That doesn't sound right to me. ADHD is a constellation of shared symptoms, grouped together and given a name for insurance and diagnostic purposes and because the treatment overlaps. The cause of those symptoms are obviously multifactorial, heavily correlated with both genetics and childhood stress. Bad news if your mom or dad didn't ever stfu when you were a baby, hardwired you to be uncomfortable without constant external stimulation and validation.
Schools at least where I live do a much better job of teaching kids to manage their emotions. And I hope parents of young children are doing a better job as well, seems like it to me, but I'm in a well off rural bubble.
I imagine TikTok sets back any progress and I'm glad it's banned. TikTok brain is a real thing. Human beings are meant to be able to focus intensely in one purposeful thing for several hours at a time and with practice anyone can learn to be highly productive and attentive if they can find a time and place to be free from distractions, and anyone can have a super memory if they set aside time and purposefully train their memory; memory is a product of focus.
So, perhaps 'essentially cause ADHD' is a bit strong, but there are absolutely studies that show that exposure to / addiction to short form video content impair focus, cause/exacerbate attention deficits, cause/exacerbate difficulty maintaining attention, as well as impair the ability to study and perform academically, worsen overall mental health etc.
Oh, and short form video content is also found to be addictive as well.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2151512
https://www.cell.com/heliyon/fulltext/S2405-8440(24)06377-1
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9127725/
In summary, brain rot.
Theres also studies which show, hilariously, that a good amount of mental health 'advice' on such short form content platforms is garbage.
This one studies the top posts on ADHD and finds half of them to be misleading.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/07067437221082854
And to round it out, heres a study on negative body image perception and self objectification amongst girls/women by short form content:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1740144523000876?via%3Dihub
In fairness, this study does find that negative self perception and self objectification increase with viewing either short or long form video content or images featuring 'ideal' women, which makes sense, as this sort of thing has been long studied before 'social media' even existed (TV, Magazines, Movies, etc).
So, while objectification and body image problems from media exposure are not new, the proliferation and exposure amount are increased dramatically in the age of widespread social media.
I would be willing to bet that had a similar study as this one been done on boys/men it would show similar results.
can also easily cause depression by constantly seeing (usually) fake people flaunting their (usually) fake life and wealth
That’s a problem with many social media platforms and the “influencer” culture they host. Instagram has been particularly criticised for this.
These heavily curated content posted on these platforms does not reflect the warts and all reality of real life. People who get too engrossed in it can quickly start to feel their lives are inadequate.
I’m not sure what the solution is for this, other than trying to better regulate the algorithms used by these platforms.
Well, better regulation of algorithms is not a thing that is going to happen.
Assuming you could actually specify this kind of content... which you probably can with some degree from the standpoint of the engineers behind the things... theres basically no way to ban or limit this kind of content in a law.
1: Giant Freedom of Speech based opposition. To some extent, yeah if you penalize it, well you are limiting free speech and artistic expression, is what will be claimed.
2: Without literally having access to the way the algorithm works, it'd be a massive tome of a law to try to pass. And also software changes, so ... you can probably rewrite your way around a specific way to limit this kind of content.
I don't know. Maybe you could pass a law that mandates if your platform has x many users or daily views, you must provide to the user far, far more in depth means to manage their own content they are thrown up.
Or perhaps you could have some kind of FAA type entity created, which is supposed to be deeply involved in the behind the scenes aspects of basically standard operation of the social media industry, as the FAA is with aircraft manufacture/airspace/airports.
Of course the counter point to that is well just look at the FAA and Boeing ot even SpaceX. Regulatory capture is a thing, and with both Boeing and SpaceX it seems like the FAA (and in SpaceX's case the EPA) either don't really care to do their jobs, or actual enforcement mechanisms are just too slow or cumbersome.
Coming to lemmy has made me have more negative views of how much I use and should be using Linux.
I only have it on one device atm…
Shhh, its now time for Hasan to interview another violent religious fundamentalist to remind us that Houthis are good actually and wanton piracy is the same thing as being a good Tankie.
Don't mention that the Houthis have actually targeted Chinese vessels, and that China also has naval forces on escort and anti piracy operations faaaar from their territorial waters.
Modern American leftism has to a great extent devolved into 'any and all of America's enemies are good actually and can do no wrong'. Except Russia. Because MAGA likes Russia, so Russia bad.
Bleck.
There was that brief period of time where Vine existed and had actual quality content.
Then the short video format was shittified after everyone began doing it, and fairly rapidly devolved into mindless attention seeking nonsense / micro personal update vlog... or worse.
Well humans are making them. Vine and other early adopter places (Lemmy) are nice until the "masses" find it.
It's awful, but people eat it up. Add in profit margins and companies jump on smelling that sweet sweet profit.
Tik Tok is blocked in my house but unfortunately reels/yt shorts have no easy way to block without affecting the rest of the service.
Yep, same story with basically every cool or neat thing ever: once it gets popular, it gets exploited and/or exploitative.
I still remember the moment my and all my friend's parents joined Facebook and I realized I wasn't seeing stuff from my friends any more, instead, inane drek about pets and clouds and bible verses.
God I miss the MySpace days.
Well, I do hope reddit dies an awful death, but I also fear the influx of insufferable people.
It really sucks that I actually am a leftist but just immediately blocked ml and hexbear, because if you say certain things or have certain opinions that are not in line with the views of basically delusional tankies, everyone screams until youre banned.
At least we dont have a huge amount of right wing fuckos as they seem to have just gone to ferment in their own echo chambers elsewhere.
I think long videos are expensive.
Social media companies like engagement. So 3 20s videos would give you more data from the user than 1 60s video.
It's three times the marketing data. And then if you're watching 2 22nd videos and 122nd ad that's a full third of your watch time as ads.
Brief is the ticket. The more you hot ot not it, the better it gets at matching you. After a couple days of swipes, you'll get a constant stream of stuff you'll actually want to see. IG and TT are good at this, yt shorts are pretty bad at it.
I've been trying to stay out of the algorithms. I watch YT by channels only, left Reddit for Lemmy, listed fb to friends walls. TT and IG only make it to me if friends or family share it. I'll go watch it then GTFO.
What a great way to dismiss an entire problems based that affects our society. It's easier to just hand wave it away as someone else's problem than to actually consider it...
When a problem becomes systematic it's now a societal and cultural problem and not an individual responsibility problem. Individual responsibility isn't working so it's now down to the society this is occurring in to solve the systematic problem in a systematic way.
That's how almost everything works
Yeah none of those kids should have cell phones. They should be about old enough to drive before they get one even.
Yup. I have kids (three under 10), and the only time my kids use my phone is when I'm literally there with them, letting them pick a video (usually Pat and Mat, Bert and Ernie, or similar). It's not every day, and never more than 30 min, usually like 15-20 min, and we take turns picking.
I'm not letting my kids have their own phone until I trust them with one, and that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon with how many of our other rules they break.
You can type in coherent sentences so it's no surprise your kids don't fall into the reported finding, your kids are off to a better start than average, I presume.
Yeah, parents are getting ruined by social media algorithms too.
Our government seems to be moving towards an "we only care about the children, but everyone, including adults, upload your government papers" approach.
Y'all got any of those protections for adults? I remember reading regulations that companies couldn't show children advertisements. Can I have some of that regulation too?
I just can't stop being cynical that there is little focus on homeless or underpaid adults, or other adult issues, but the one problem we're focused on just so happens to include everyone giving up anonymity on the Internet.
We do need to help kids with social media, but there's a lot of other challenges they will soon face as adults that we're ignoring.
Are there any examples of 'for the kids' legislation that isn't just something like backdoor encryption masquerading as protecting the young?
Uhh, yes, in fact I'd say most. There's entire systems of childhood health legislation, education, labor, you name it. This is an availability bias showing through. Think about it for five minutes and I bet you can come up with a dozen examples.
Yes, but it's also new territory for us as a species. I'm sure the guidance and monitors will be significantly improved in the next decade, but a decade ago... It was the wild west, baby.
but it doesn't mean we ignore guns.
Uuuh, you sure about that? It seems like that shit keeps happening and nothing at all is being done about it.
oh please. if guns became sentient someone would stack three of them in a trenchcoat and give them the right to vote.
Children can't do that if you're a responsible parent that keeps an eye on what their child is doing. Y'know, the bare minimum of parenting.
if you're a responsible parent that keeps an eye on what their child is doing.
Unfortunately you can't run a society based on how people should behave. That's the entire reason we have a legal system and the means to implement safeguards for our population.
So why do locks exist, if society runs on how people should behave? Why do we have a court system, if we assume no crimes will ever be committed? Why do we have laws?
That's why we have them friend, because it couldn't. The system is based on punishing antisocial behavior.
Imagine not realizing that people have to work for a living... Or that adult mental health is at an all time low. Or that social media manipulation affects people who are parents as well as their kids.
Similarly just kicking the problem down the road like you're doing doesn't actually solve it. It just inhibits solutions and contributes to the problem.
So in this instance people that think like your comment states actually are indirectly part of the problem. Which is ironic.
That's sort of true, but "rules for thee and not for me" just kicks the can down the road. They're going to copy you, so it's really important to set a good example, at least when your kids can see you.
It’s not “rules for thee and not for me,” unless you consider that true for things like drinking alcohol. It’s protecting children from something they are not cognitively developed enough to be dealing with.
The difference is that it's easy to point to reasons why a child shouldn't be drinking alcohol (illegal, liver immaturity, etc), and less easy to point to why they shouldn't be on social media, esp. if their friends are using it.
Where the line is more fuzzy, I think parents should set a more strict standard for themselves, at least in front of their children.
I think the line is, TikTok pulls a video at random it thinks you’ll want to watch. This means that you may be exposed to basically anything a person felt like filming. This includes violent or pornographic content, which children should not be exposed to.
Being a parent is telling your children no sometimes. Being a parent means that you should vet the media that your child is being exposed to, which is impossible on a platform like TikTok, and sometimes make the decision for them that they are not old enough to be exposed to certain material.
It really feels like folks don’t want to be parents - they want to hand the iPad over to the screaming toddler so that they can be babysat by their own phone. I don’t understand why one would have children, if they weren’t interested in doing the work of parenting those kids.
My thoughts exactly.
I will say, however, that I'm generally against content filtering. My kids know the rules, and they know if they violate them, they lose device privileges. Simple as that. If I put parental controls on, they'll just circumvent them (and I'll teach them how to if they ask). I know because I was a kid and constantly got around stupid content filters at school.
Either I trust them with the device, or I don't, no half-measures. For example:
That's it. I generally allow them to use devices unsupervised, though in a public area so I can walk over and check on them. I intend to give them their own devices as they get older (i.e. they'll set their own passwords). But if they violate my trust, it's their fault, not the content filter's, and they lose privileges.
Childless young people downvoting this, perhaps not able to admit they're just like mom or dad?
For most of us I'm sorry but it's true! Kids are mirrors; apples don't fall far from trees. Not all of them. Some carry.
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn't work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !antinatalism@lemmy.world
You wouldn't download a car.
Can't, but you can download a video of me stealing a car!
The next generation is so fucked. Wait...they be the ones who take care of me in the old person home. I'm fucked as will.
People have been claiming that new media will destroy society at least since we invented writing, and probably before.
No I get that, but this is different honestly. Look up rates of teenage depression/anxiety/suicide attempts, it's a stunning correlation with the advent of smartphones and social media. Millenials got out just in time.
I agree there are still a lot of problems with social media, not the least of which is I'm not sure if yt or fb ever adjusted their algos to not immediately start pushing alt right and neo nazi content. But don't forget that the suicide rates are also correlated with a bunch of other bad shit, like growing income inequality and healthcare spending, loss of 3rd places, rent hikes, etc.
I think it has a lot more to do with social media than smart phones. I remember kids being bullied through tombstone messages on Oregon Trail floppies.
They're gonna put a camera in your room and post all your old people antics on future tik tok
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/mtTR0mjWY2g?si=Wj6m9P7JFRfICwBu
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Karma.
The young treat the old however they do. But then the young grow old and get treated the same.
I managed to almost completly keep my children away from it for now (8 and 10). But it is a struggle. And I will soon lose that struggle. So many children at age 8 or 9 have smartphones for fs sake.
I plan to slowly introduce them to stuff like this, so they will be able to deal with it. I did so rather successfully with the other bullshit, like Roblox. They are only allowed to play it when I am in the room, and I check that they follow that rule (they do).
Feels like walking on the edge though. Still unsure when to open the TikTok thing. Too early is bad, but too late and they will somehow already he on tiktok and I just don't know about it.
my siblings managed to keep their kids away from smartphones until 4th grade. And even that was a struggle.
sadly it just falls into the camp of 'everyone else is doing it'. and if your kid isn't they will be socially ostracized.
Some kids also get obsessive about phones once they get one, or obsessed with other people's phones until then.
Do you have any tips? My kids are still pretty young (3 and 2) and I really want to avoid them having acess to these sorts of things.
the main thing for you is to stay off your phone as well. Kids watch their parents closely and humans have an in built need for "fairness", if they see you addicted to it they will never stop wanting to do the same.
Yea, that makes sense. Whenever I'm home from work, I make sure the phone goes on the counter. Thankfully, I'm not into social media all that much.
I'd add the "have clear rules" concept to this and enforce the rules. Don't be wishy washy. But communicate the rules and be prepared to explain the rules.
But also accept that theory and practice are not the same. Imo you should allow them enough, that they don't isolated from their friends experiences. That is why I allow them to play Roblox under supervision or why I set up a Minecraft Server so that they can play online with their friend in a safe environment (but only on weekends for a fixed time period).
"In my household, the only addictive spyware we use is made in the USA!!!"
Edit: everyone below me is proving my point exactly.
Unironically yes, at least the US government is something we can openly criticize and attempt to change while living within its borders. Try criticizing the Chinese government from within China, let me know how that works out for you. I'll take homegrown American spyware any day.
People love to repeat this, but US companies aren't coming from a place of hostile intent like china's special brand of tik tok for the states.
They're both focused on profit. The only reason you see the other one as scary is because it's owned by the scary scary Chinese. Red scare all over again.
No tiktok is not focused on profit. It literally has one of the worst/non existent monetization systems.
Case in point. Vine literally can't survive and so shouldn't TikTok. Unless of course it's getting propped up by a government with endless funds and not focused on profits.
Why are you so convinced that an advertising platform that a 1/3rd of the country is glued to is unsustainable. And that's ignoring the rest of the world, which is the majority of their user base.
What's the connection between Uber and China, then? I thought it was somewhat common for tech companies to be unprofitable for very long periods of time backed only by capital, but it may be China. Has anyone looked into this? Does Xi know what I like to order on weekends? Why haven't we banned this yet
Because the USA strong armed them into giving their platform handling to Oracle Corp, a top tier US govt contractor.
But since pro-palestine cries can't be silenced on TikTok as easily as Zio media, taking control of the platform is no longer enough
It's the same thing, the international one was called TikTok and the US version is handled by Oracle
It's called douyin or something idk in China but it's the same shit
You say “red scare” as if China isn’t a hostile nation state to the US. Go look at western company penetration in China if you want. Are you calling it “western scare” when China blocks yet another western company? I didn’t think so.
So Facebook has the best interest of the people at heart?
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/11/facebooks-dangerous-experiment-teen-girls/620767/
Absolute bullshit. Go ahead and prove what you said, I'll wait here. Find any comments on Lemmy that are pro-Facebook or pro-Meta.
Facebook is not intentionally doing it. It was a byproduct of capitalism. While TikTok doesn't care about profits and only wants to control our government and people.
Most 10 years ago they were already manipulating people on purpose
You know though that the United States have "taken down" governments before? Americans do not have any right to feel superior on this issue in the slightest way
To do both... But keep your head in the sand as long as you want
Hmm, here's what Zuckerberg said when he launched Facebook:
According to SAI sources, the following exchange is between a 19-year-old Mark Zuckerberg and a friend shortly after Mark launched The Facebook in his dorm room:
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask.
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks.
Brutal.
Could Mark have been completely joking? Sure. But the exchange does reveal that Facebook's aggressive attitude toward privacy may have begun early on.
They may not be trying to control elections (they certainly have their fingers in that pie too), but they're still hostile to users.
It's not the same. China wants to fuck up the American youth. That's why their version of tiktok is so different from ours. But you already knew that I'm sure
Nah, I don't use tiktok, Chinese or otherwise so I wouldn't know the difference. But you're missing the point.
And yet, you claim one is inheritly worse than the other or should be preferered. To me, they are equally bad. If anything, the USA manipulation is worse - they can use that knowledge more easily and to greater effect than an attacker on the other side of the world.
- USA organisations abuse social media to spy on and influence citizens.
- Chinese
organisationsgenocidal dictatorship abuse social media to spy on and influence citizens.
Are the American companies doing it in pursuit of destabilizing the United States population for the betterment of the CCP and its interests?
Is the Chinese company doing it in pursuit of destabilizing the United States population for the betterment of the CCP and its interests?
I doubt it, parents will just move them to YouTube, Instagram, or some other platform. The TikTok ban is intended to limit misinformation by the CCP, and that doesn't really matter for this age of kids.
The more important thing to me is building habits. I care less about how much they're watching vs how they're spending their time generally.
We have a rule where our kids need to read to be able to watch/play games, and we cap at 2hr/day. If they read 1hr, they can watch/play for 30min. My kids seem to have a pretty good mix of reading, watching/playing, and playing outside w/ friends, so I think it works.
Yea. We do something similar. It's an electronic allowance. If you use it it's done for the day. I change it for rainy days and vacations if we are traveling in the car or whatever. But it's easy to set up with Google family. And then you can see what they are doing. Not to be snoopy. Just to teach them the right way to protect themselves online. I don't want them to turn 18 and be completely lost.
I give my kids 30 min "free" on Saturdays, which gets doubled if they spend it in a game with a sibling. For trips, I make my kids all do the same thing, so either watch the same show, listen to the same audiobook, etc.
I personally don't digitally track what my kids do at all, I instead rely on trust and keeping devices in a public space. I tell them what's acceptable, and occasionally hang out with them while they're doing whatever. As they follow the rules, I give them more autonomy (e.g. my oldest may get their own PC soon-ish), but if they break the rules, they lose access. The only parental controls I use is for my 4yo, because she keeps getting into my Steam Deck and Switch w/o asking, but my other kids know the passcode on the Switch (not my Steam Deck, that's mine).
It's a bit bumpy, but I'm hopeful that having rules but no actual walls teaches them to learn to self-regulate and will help them in the long-run. It worked for me as a kid.
Probably plenty. Tik tok is just the biggest owned by a foreign government that also is showing pretty immediate extreme negative effects on children’s attention spans and learning capabilities.
But people are still gonna whine because they’re 25 year olds who need to watch 80 videos of unboxing shoes in 4 minutes . That’s really the only pro tik tok argument there is.
It sets a pretty chilling precedent that non-American competition can be forced to sell to Americans for (insert arbitrary reason here).
I am in favor of TikTok at least becoming restricted to adults only if not outright banned, just warning about the consequences of doing it this way.
It's owned by the CCP who is currently trying to undermine our election. It tried to do it in Taiwan where I currently live.
It's owned by the CCP who is currently trying to undermine our election
Not that this may not be true, but the USA undermines it's own foundation of democracy
While the US government is not perfect, it still is OUR own government. The CCP is a literal adversary.
Wtf kind of response is that? “The Chinese government should get a say in our government because our government isn’t perfect.”
Nothing but Chinese shills or boys here. It’s wild anyone is stupid enough to say this
It really doesn’t set a bad precedent forcing a foreign adversary to have less control over the US population. We should really force the sale of a lot of Chinese properties in the US as well. A foreign government should not have so much control over rental and housing prices in the US.
Why are you pro foreign adversary controlling the daily lives of Americans? It’s a very odd stance to take and openly say unless you’re not American obviously.
I'm guessing you've never been on TikTok. It's a pretty good news source and information disseminator. Your algorithm feeds you what you pick so if you linger on posts from physical therapists and psychologists about child development, that's what you learn about. If you linger on political posts highlighting our local and federal government's corruption, you get that.
I'm all for banning it (and all social media) for children, but if you think TikTok is all trash TV, you've been successfully propagandized.
Wtf? You see nothing wrong with your first two sentences??? “It’s great at disseminating information. The Chinese government learns how I think then starts to show me propaganda they want that will align with my opinions so they can drive how I think and what I learn in the future”
That’s fucking wild that you’re saying all of this is a positive thing.
It's not in American businesses best interest overthrow a government. Can't say the same for the CCP tho. Fuck the CCP.
Lol I hope that's a poor choice of words, maybe you MIGHT have a point if you specified the US government though even that isn't true https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
Wow, that is literally 1 example of an obscure time in the early 19th century.
A mass majority of an American company has zero interest to hurt the community it is based in. The stability of a government and the strength of it's community determines if people would buy/use a product. It also supplies a competent workforce and a network of security that helps a company prosper.
I use TikTok routinely. I actually spend time on Chinese parts of TikTok, because I know a little Chinese. I’ve seen content that the CCP would be very much opposed to - including discussions of the Tank Man from Tiananmen Square and homosexuality in Chinese history.
TikTok has censorship certainly, but it’s more targeted towards the Gaza conflict.
I use TikTok routinely.
Your experience is different from other experience. That's the main issue. They are and can target specific people in specific groups and in specific regions. You seeing this content just means you're not important enough for them to target.
As can/do Facebook and every other social media platform. But I find it hard to take this idea that TikTok is an arm of the CCP seriously when I routinely discuss Ughyur Muslims and Tiananmen square with folks, and see depictions of Chairman Mao as Pooh Bear.
The more shady shit is the shop and how every third video is an unlabeled ad. TikTok wants to make money first and foremost. I don’t think TikTok is some force for good in the world, but what they are doing is no different from what Meta and Google are doing.
Tiktok has one of the worse/non existent monetization programs. Its clearly not important to them how bad it is.
My extended family in Taiwan would routinely see fake news on Tiktok during the Taiwan elections.
That's the thing. You don't know. Nobody knows except the CCP. That's the problem.
That's the thing. You don't know. Nobody knows except the CCP. That's the problem.
But you do about every other social media platform?
Fake news is not exclusive to a single platform. Teach your family about reputable news sources and stop trying to shoehorn US propaganda down everyone's throats like it makes you look smart. Tiktok learned everything it does by the likes of facebook, Google and Twitter.
Why do you think US social media is everywhere all over the world with near instant or sometimes even get higher bandwidth preference in some countries? If you don't think the US government has nothing to do with the level of complexities that entails dealing with local governments/infrastructure and planning, then I guess "ignorance is a bliss", and I hope the US government will bring you peace and much freedumb. Don't complain when they come in blasting tho.
It's one thing to have fake news that is uncontrolled. It's another thing when a literal adversary uses fake news as a tool to create discourse.
A social media company has one thing in mind. Profits. Even if it means that a byproduct of profits is discourse. But TikTok sole purpose is discourse. They literally don't care about profits.
With YouTube kids, and the popularity of channels like cocomelon, I'd be surprised if it's less than 75%...
What does "on tiktok" mean?
Unsupervised with their own accounts? I feel like that's difficult to believe. Watching a few tiktoks before dinner with their parents? That doesn't really strike me as a problem.
While I don't entirely disagree with the author, I feel like this is a far too superficial look at what is a larger societal problem: young people have checked out.
He makes the argument that mental health is in decline, and I'm not sure if that's true or we've just removed the stigma from therapy... But of more concern to me is that young people just DGAF, and I think that's because older generations have left nothing for younger generations to inherit, besides ruin. Kids 5-7 aren't gonna understand that, but they're gonna pick up the vibes from their parents.
I don't think its difficult to imagine 30% of 5 to 7s with their own phones on tiktok nearly all the time.
Raising kids is hard, especially when youre poor and stressed out or tired all the time, its waaay easier to just get them a phone.
The number of people I've met in the last couple of years? Yeah, I live amongst the poors, the abusive parents and single moms and drunk/drug addicted dads... all their kids either have their own phones or the family has one for all the kids, who basically fight over it and get smacked by a parent or older sibling when theyre being too rowdy.
A few weeks ago I was walking, puffing on a nicotine vape. A school bus pulls up and drops off what could not have been older than 2nd graders, who began hounding me: Lemme hit that wax bro, Share your wax!
These are those 5 to 7s that are on TikTok, or close to it. I didnt even realize what Wax was at first, literally had to scurry home and lookup that wax is now the term for basically dab pens.
So yeah, theres huge segments of the population where 7 year olds want a highly concentrated dose of MJ from a literal random person theyve never seen before.
Devo: It's a beautiful world we live in... for you, but not for me.
I mean, that's kind of my point - in situations like that, it seems like using Tiktok is small potatoes compared to the more significant issues that'd cause problem behavior. The Tiktok consumption is just another symptom, and if it wasn't tiktok it'd be some other escape mechanism.
To me, the article seems lazy, complaining about a superficial problem without spending effort to even consider or mention underlying root causes that could give rise to it and must be solved first.
And to be clear I'm not blaming the parents, they're not the "root cause" I'm talking about. They're victims too, in large part. They and their kids are stuck in a harmful cycle, and people with the ability to break that cycle are unwilling to do so.
You explicitly said you couldnt imagine 30% of 5-7 year olds having essentially unfettered access to TikTok, and you said the TikTok problem is a symptom of general mental health decline in youths.
You did not say your point was that 30% of 5-7s are using TikTok habitually, you expressed incredulity to this, to which I responded.
Anyway, you want a root cause?
Poverty, drug addiction, poor parenting.
Yeah, I am going to blame the parents, at least partially.
Oh you have kids and you are not able to actually raise them, hand them off to TikTok instead? You shouldn't have had kids you can't actually raise.
Obviously, this would happen a lot less if maybe we redistributed some wealth from the top to the bottom, actually had an economy and society that allowed for all people to live well.
Sure the article is superficial in the sense it isnt exploring root causes, but it doesnt really purport to try. That would probably end up being a completely different and much more complex piece of writing.
Further, this is honest-broker, a website for basically well to do yuppies who were born into connections and managed to maintain the socio economic strata they were born into, where they fret about how the poors are poor because theyre stupid, and minutiae about their investments.
What did you expect?
Yeah, I know I shouldn't expect much from a site like that, but since it's shared here I felt like I should shine a little light on the deeper issues.
This kind of superficial "journalism" rage-baiting boomers for clicks is really frustrating to me. Shit like this is brain-rot at least as bad as Tiktok is. It has always existed, but the extent to which it has replaced actual analysis and investigation is depressing.
Yes, the parents are partially at fault, of course. But as you indicated, there are significant societal pressures that force families into dynamics like this and it's not realistic to expect an overwhelming majority to be able to resist it, alone. And since we're not about to engage in class-based eugenics, it's up to society to give them a serviceable ladder to climb out of their situation.
So, TLDR; I wanted to shine a light on deeper issues, so that people don't think that this is solely a moral failing of parents, and that they DO understand that we have a collective responsibility to help families.
You would think that with all those kids watching, Xi would lean into the whole Winnie the Pooh resemblance.
I’m not completely convinced. It is possible but sounds a bit high to me. It is based on a survey of less than 3k parents, and although I found the BBC article, it doesn’t seem to link to the actual source. It is therefore difficult to take this too seriously without seeing exactly who was interviewed and how the questions were worded.
It's probably not that bad, but I wouldn't be surprised just based on anecdotal experience.
I'm a provider at a children's hospital and phones have always been an issue during appointments. Before, it was mostly an issue with getting parents to pay attention or answer questions during the evaluation.
However since COVID, we've noticed a large increase of parents using tablets and phones as a constant babysitter. These children are so emotionally attached to their screens that they will tantrum until they have access to their screen again.
Yeah, it sounds real high to me. Perhaps the criteria is have ever seen a tt video.
Now yt, easily > 50%. It's practically a babysitter. Putting cocomellon in front of your 3yo to get 30 minutes of peace is a parental guilty pleasure.
Tweens, sure. IG, TT, whatever.
The TikTok van isn't bad, it's great for humanity, it's great for kids.
Can we now do the same with Instagram and Facebook and the likes? Basically all of social media?
Can we also please start banning kids from the Internet now? Since 20 years ago I've been saying that kids under 14-16 should not be on the Internet, or if they do, with monitoring and very limited time and access. The Internet is NOT a healthy place for kids. Hell, today they Internet isn't a healthy place for adults, but that is a different story.
I hate desantis, but that Florida kids and social media ban is great
Can we now do the same with Instagram and Facebook and the likes? Basically all of social media?
No. In fact, we're going to gear up our marketing campaigns for IG and YT so that we can reroute all that profitable children's traffic to a Good American Liberty Loving Social Media Company.
Can we also please start banning kids from the Internet now? Since 20 years ago I’ve been saying that kids under 14-16 should not be on the Internet
I can't imagine how this would be enforced, much less whether arbitrarily cutting kids off from what will (let's face it) be an essential part of their lives as adults is actually good for them.
To pull from an old XKCD, simply giving people a novel form of communication isn't what's bad for them.
This shit is what's bad for them
And you need to moderate content in order to avoid this sort of shit. Simply banning it all makes about as much sense as banning your kids from looking at magazines, because Playbook and Heavy Metal exist.
I hate desantis, but that Florida kids and social media ban is great
If you consider how Florida actually enforces its laws, I think what you'll find its actually really awful. You're going to have a bunch of lower-middle class parents and teachers getting random filings against them for things they have very little control over.
If you consider how Florida actually enforces its laws, I think what you’ll find its actually really awful.
And like everything that a Republican does, despite claims to "protect children" or "uphold family values" or want "small government", the only actual effect will be massive government overreach into private homes and lives.
We need to ban the internet for select communities. Starting from those who are under the age 25. Other properties should be selected too eventually.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/HteHmAa7TCY?si=n8-Dqhht_bCJcAKd
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
it's not a ban. It's highly likely China will allow Tiktok to split off a USA version before the deadline is up, if they don't get it tossed in court. TikTok isn't going anywhere.
I turned out perfectly fine without a phone until age 15, and I'm 17 now, I don't really use social media other than reddit, Lemmy and YouTube on my phone and I barely use it, since I'm more likely to use my iPad at home exclusively.
I feel as though more parents need to do the same mine did, restrict access to smartphones until ages the kid is more likely to explore the world more, specifically for safety, but still teach them to concentrate on stops while on public transport, on where they walk, etc. and not use their phone on the go apart from when time is able to pass and be stationary.
I cringe at the fact kids a third or less my age are allowed phones, I shouldn't even be allowed since my brain is still developing, i cant imagine the levels of braindead these children will be when they get to my age, since people my age are already horrific enough...
I was given a phone quite young but completely discarded it after I bought myself a thinkpad. No need for it when I can be comfortable on my Arch setup. I think the amount of brain damage could be severely reduced if they only had access to a family PC or something. Most kids probably wouldn't even touch the PC until way later.
....which starts with P which rhymes with T which stands for trouble.
Mothers of River City is your son starting to buckle his knickerbockers below the knee?
Why would using a phone affect brain development negatively? We aren't talking about children sniffing Ketamine or drinking a fifth of vodka here.
Socialization is a slow process. Many people who have good families and rich environments still have problems learning how to have face to face conversations. Look how many people on this site talk about not wanting to have a conversation over the phone or talk to a stranger in a shop.
What does this have to do with smartphones and the internet? The internet is a means of gathering information first, and a form of communication second. I don't get what socialization has to do with the first one. If you want people to be comfortable communicating on the internet (or via phone or whatever) then presumably they need to start earlier.
As for people struggling with phones, that's because a) lots of people here are autistic, and b) voice phones are not an ideal form of communication anyway. Either way the answer is practice, not shying away from the problem.
the answer is practice,
There are only so many hours in the day. If a child spends eight hours a day glued to the phone, they aren't going to learn social skills.
Okay first who said eight hours? I am not saying there shouldn't be limits, just that banning the internet completely is a bad idea. Second communicating with technology is an essential social skill in itself, and being able to use technology and apply critical thinking to things you read is absolutely essential. Lots of people work from home using technology. Almost everyone will have to use technology to do research e.g. in college.
Socialization is a slow process. Many people who have good families and rich environments still have problems learning how to have face to face conversations. Look how many people on this site talk about not wanting to have a conversation over the phone or talk to a stranger in a shop.
That's my original comment. Never said anything about banning the internet.
Yes in a thread about banning kids from having smartphones, which are the main way people access the internetwork nowadays.
well since social media can affect attention spans negatively, as I've observed with myself recently, I don't think the effects of such would translate positively into social or educational circumstances, arguably the most needed situations in a child's life at that time, even if they are almost an adult.
sure, alcohol and drugs do still affect a child quite intensely, though I'm saying that, is social media and the endless dopamine harvesting NOT a drug? if you think about it, it extracts, makes a person want to come back for more, causing addiction, further extracting more, losing its effectiveness and making it almost impossible to quit from there.
people may say it isn't addictive, but its just that it isn't as noticeable since it is a society-wide phenomena which is seen as positive.
sure, alcohol and drugs do still affect a child quite intensely, though I'm saying that, is social media and the endless dopamine harvesting NOT a drug? if you think about it, it extracts, makes a person want to come back for more, causing addiction, further extracting more, losing its effectiveness and making it almost impossible to quit from there.
I don't think you understand what drugs are or can do. They don't all just blindly increase dopamine. They have many other effects on the mind and body that social media does not. This whole concept of dopamine detoxes and addiction = dopamine needs to die too. It's not based on solid scientific understanding as addiction is far more complex than this and comes in multiple, separate forms. Even drugs like amphetamines that primarily interact with the dopamine system don't always lead to addiction (ask anyone with experience of ADHD meds). Thinking dopamine is only about addiction and vice versa is like thinking electricity is only for heating and that all heating must be done using electricty.
Raising children without access to the internet is both backwards for their education and actively dangerous. The internet has allowed minors in bad situations to escape or get help multiple times. It's also made people realise their parents or guardians are insane or abusive including those who are members of dangerous religions and cults, are homophobic, or are abusive for other reasons. School in some countries is also packed full of propaganda, and even when it isn't they can't always help and are sometimes a source of abuse themselves. Restricting access to information isn't a good thing.
social media isn't the phone's fault.
it seems like you've confused hardware and software.
no, I'm not confused at all, I am meaning that the smartphone is the most accessible way to utilise social media, meaning due to its formfactor, it is the most convenient way to access it.
are you more likely to use a desktop PC using android x86 (just an example) or use a smartphone? its almost like using a smartwatch to use Photoshop, its not the same as using a desktop, you know what I mean?
You are not a clever man.
If you were in any way correct, we should be banning cars and trucks from the USA, because they're the most accessible way drugs are transported. To stop drugs, we should ban cars. Cars are making it far too easy to get that nose candy.
Yeah, no. Hardware has nothing to do with this.
(I'm not even going to start with how insane your mentioning android x86 is; like somehow that esoteric version of an OS has something to do with social media. I'm guessing you think everything uses apps, and social media doesn't run through web pages?)
You don't need to run Android x86 to access a social media site on a computer. What are you talking about?
im just giving an example that has the same software, im not saying its better or that you need it.
except they don't have the same software. Phones use ARM, not x86.
(amusingly, if you had just said "Android", you would have seemed less insane. still insane, since you could have just said 'linux', but less. But even saying that would still make you insane, since the operating system isn't the social media, and isn't what you were talking about.)
Nah, social media is like a hydra. Another "TikTok" will just be born from the ban.
Nothing is changing drastically until we have better data protection laws.
Ban all Chinese/Russian social media companies. GG EZ.
Edit: sorry my bad, I didn't realize you were one of the people that thinks all social media is the same.
You realize that tik toks sole purpose is to brainwash western youth right? This is propaganda 101.