I wanted to say yes, but. But I think the most truthful answer for me is just yes. I think overall they are also unhealthy for adults. They're a fact of our world now, so I am betting on trying to improve them. It is a majro part of why I am on the fediverse.
@malte because you said that you're on the Fediverse because social networks are unhealthy for kids and adults. For me, that means either that you don't think the Fediverse is a social network, or that you think it's ok or necessary to do something unhealthy.
What I meant to say is that I think the way social networks work at the moment are overall unhealthy for us. The reason I'm here is that I see this as the most likely place to improve the situation.
@malte I think you conflate social network with commercial web platforms. The profit motive has a way of encouraging child abuse and exploitation. But the corpos don't get to define social networks. They try but don't let them.
Yes, as it is right now, unfortunately still part of the larger trends that overall make us unhappy. My theory is the larger context has much bigger impact than the fediverse can reverse as it is. We are in most respects a product of the larger context.
Alcohol is toxic to every human tissue, but we put in place precautions... We rigorously regulate the production, distribution, sale, and consumption of it. We have medical interventions for its abuse. We attach social stigma to those who purposefully abuse it.
We do ZERO of those things to social media, despite knowing that, especially in terms of mental health it can be as bad or worse for especially young people than alcohol and or drug abuse.....
So, yeah. Sometimes people choose to do things that are "bad" for them, but they can make informed decisions.
Social Media has suffered few if any of the oversights, restrictions, repercussions, as other harmful activities.
I'm curious how many people voting on this have young ones (I have a teen, and voted "no but" because they have an incredible social life, largely fueled by keeping in touch with people online, but we have so far restricted them to networks of closed groups, not "open world" social networks, mostly)
Not social networks per se, but the purposefully addictive design that tries to keep people on platforms and show them ads and the lack of reporting and moderation are issues that affect everyone but minors disproportionally
It is not that social networks exist, or that they are social that makes them unhealthy, it's algorithmic manipulation by billionaires.
I have just had the unfortunately experience these past few days of what happens when Facebook randomly decides to put my political posts in front of the eyeballs of angry white men.
I answered Yes, but. I think rather than social networks in their entirety it is algorithms designed to encourage addiction and amplifying harmful content that are most unhealthy (for everyone not just minors).
no, but: websites and apps that optimize for maximum addiction ("engagement") so that they can sell more ads are bad for *everyone*, and *everyone* includes minors. some of those websites are social networks. it's not a wrong statement, but putting the focus on "social network" and "minors" is doubly the wrong focus.
Anything indulged in to excess will be unhealthy. Don't quite see why Google and Meta should be to blame in that Los Angeles court case though, no matter how ugly their algorithms are. It's like blaming a tree for a motorist's demise.
ah. I now see where the support for the privacy invasion legislation is coming from.
the idea that children should sit silent, isolated, and inert, until their 18th birthday whereupon they magically gain all the skills needed to live well is what's unhealthy for children.
just let them live their lives with unconditional agency, love, and support. I guarantee you it is better. sometimes they might go online! you are just going to have to find a way to deal with that, team.
Conceptually, no. An online social space isnt automatically anything but social
But as created and run currently, by people and corporate entities who design social networks to maximize engagement by outrage and do not design for healthy use?
That's bad for basically everyone, especially kids who are still learning to navigate their physical social spaces.
I do a lot of polls on my account at Mastodon. I get the same questions or requests multiple times, so I made this FAQ to make it easier to reply. Q: Why do you do so many polls? A: I like to think…
through high school both my parents worked and i was largely left on my own in the house with my 3 siblings. between the age of 13-17 i was in a lot of public discord servers and met a wide variety of people, who shared my extremely crude and childish sense of humor at that time. it was quite nice having human company, even if it was from all over the world and not down the street. however i also had one too many experiences of being DM'd "i did it again :333" or "reply or ill really jump" when I was the ripe age of 14 sipping on root beer and eating chips.
and apparently im not alone in that experience of becoming an uncertified discord therapist because i know so many people who experienced a similar deal, or otherwise wound up in petty internet drama with The Most Insufferable People Ever.
The internet is such an unbelievably varied space that its impossible to really quantify in one number or sentence how healthy it is. It'll be a spin at the roulette table on what you find any given day on any given platform, and with every conceivable human concept available with a bash of a keyboard, anyone can access anything.
I believe that knowledge should not be constrained and social networks often are the gateway to the most up to date conversations on current events and evolving knowledge, with an equal part of rot.
no, and by that i mean i wish i found the good social networks when i was like 11 - then maybe i wouldn’t have been depressed my entire teenage years and would have realized I’m trans like a decade earlier
children need active and effective supervision and some on social networks have it but some don't. social networks are dangerous for children who don't have that supervision. it's the same with irl social networks.
I think it depends on how they're used, and I think it's mostly the commercial social networks that are unhealthy, and not just for minors. Having your opinions and knowledge of current events shaped by a corporate entity is unquestionably bad. I don't think minors are significantly more susceptible to that external manipulation than adults are.
(1/2) @evan I've always opposed sanitizing the world for kids. They *will* get online & find stuff. I did (just w/BBS's!).
I *am* sure so-called “social media” *is* toxic for kids. Heck:it's toxic for most adults. But age verification laws'll put 16 yr olds into business of making fake ids for 10 yr olds. My mother read Tipper Gore's book & Destroyed all my #punk tapes. Lars brought me his to school to listen to free. & the censorship made me an activist for life. So, maybe upsides?🤷 #EvanPoll
Yes, but mostly because creating safe digital spaces for minors is difficult. You need crack moderation teams and robust digital safety plans, as well as actually having their best interests at heart. Very difficult goal to align with those of for-profit companies, extremely difficult to implement by independent groups due to lack of funding. Not to mention the tension that anonymity protects but many protective measures require at least the identification that a user is a minor.
Dialogue is the only way we can all get along, whether we agree with each other or not. Sadly, some people don't deserve that level of respect.
I've put up with a lot of shit flung at me over the years. I'm happy to be insulted to a certain degree, be denigrated, have my words twisted, and often be lied about, but there comes a time when enough is enough, and I have to hit the Mute button.
They have to be extremely bad for me to block them.
Given mine is populated with folk who can't control themselves even after, in some cases, being told they're crossing the line, I can't see myself un-muting anyone any time soon, which is a shame as there are at least two people on there I was originally friends with, but they decided to turn on me for some reason. 🤷🏻♂️
@kim I get it; it's a tough time in the world and people see it as a way to blow off steam. Blocking is good, modeling good behaviour is good. We can get there.
I never felt like SoundCloud was unhealthy, or IRC back in my days. But yes the so called social media that is just algorithmic based spitting out horseshit of content and bullshit ads absolutely are.
yes, but they can also be one of the only safe spaces/resourses for certain marginalized youths (broken homes, lgbtq kids, disabled kids, etc) and i honestly think preventing this abuse is worth the risks.
Inherently, being part of a social group can be important esp. when you're the type who doesn't mix normally (me in my youth.. 0 friends but my ZX Spectrum.. would have killed for something like Mastodon back then).
But the way they're run by corporations with no thought for the damage their algorithms can do.. just more eyeballs means more profit.. makes them a toxic place. We need to fix that.
For me, it’s a “No, but…”. I grew up using BBS (only for a short time) and then Usenet. There have always been toxic elements there, and certainly not everything was age-appropriate. So it’s also a reflection of society. And today, especially on commercial networks, that reflection of society is the attention economy and the greed for data.
Everyone has a responsibility to ensure that these networks are safe for all users. Children should not simply be shielded from them, but rather taught how to use these media. They will find a way to participate anyway.
the problem is "social media" algos. they intentionally fuck with us for profit. bad for everyone but kids are less prepared for manipulation and their brains are still changing. beyond the personal, taken together, they also have a societal impact.
I think staying connected to people they know IRL via "social networking" tools is great for minors. and I think a purely reverse chronological feed without ads is a better way to get news for everyone.
Social networks are not unhealthy, but the most common type of social networks, the ones designed to harvest attention, are unhealthy. I would, reluctantly, allow my child to use Mastodon when she is old enough for it. But I don't like her to have any interaction with Instagram, TikTok and similar.
I also think they are unhealthy for adults and should be regulated to remove all targeted adds and user data collection. Also platforms should not pay content creators directly.
I don't know. I think they certainly can be, but it depends on the age of the kid and their situation. There are queer kids with bigoted parents who can only find support online. There are also kids who get harassed and bullied to the point where they harm themselves. I don't think there's an easy answer.
I think social network platforms are good for people. Connecting with people you care about, meeting new people, expressing your ideas and your creativity, sharing your daily life, learning about the vast diversity of human experience -- these are all positive things that social networking platforms can bring us.
I don't think minors are excepted from this. I think that children benefit from seeing and being seen and learning how to represent the self. Teens are even more in need of exploring culture and subculture, connecting with people well outside their immediate circle who share their interests or problems, making friends, having romances.
I also don't think we've found the perfect balance between the privacy settings we need to protect kids from predators of all kinds, and the wide social horizons needed to let kids and especially teens discover diverse kinds of people and find out who they really are. There might not be a one-size-fits-all set of rules that works for every culture, every family, and every kid.
I realize that this is my answer to everything, but: I think there's value in experimenting with different options, providing a full menu of different platforms, and letting parents, kids and teens make their own choices about what works for them.
Federation lets users choose the parameters that work for them -- who can find you, who can follow, who can message, what appears in the feed -- and still stay connected to the wider social web. Your rules of engagement shouldn't cut you off.
I recognize that there's harm in social network platforms. Time you spend behind a screen is time that you're not engaging with people directly in real life, or out in the world exploring, or exercising, or being in nature. People can be terrible to one another, and it can crush your feelings for days. But I also think that it's possible, if we do it right, to have the positives of self-expression, learning and connection outweigh the negatives of distraction and conflict.
I wouldn't have made it my my life's work to making interconnected social networking platforms if I didn't think they could be a net positive influence on people and on the world.
I think I am with you on the "no, but...", and I can see why others are not. If someone's "social network" experience has *only* happened in the time frame since Facebook and shortly thereafter Twitter turned to monetization-motivated algorithms, then their ability to conceive of different is limited. There is no distinction in most minds between "social network" and "social MEDIA" and treating those as synonymous limits understanding.
One big thing I've noticed with my kids vs. even a few years before that, is the social network/pressure never turns off for some of them.
Social things (good and bad, but more often bad) catch fire much faster and stay burning for much longer, when there's no mandated community-wide break between 3:30pm and 8:30am the next morning (or the weekend).
Of course we still talked to some of our friends after school when we were that age, but for them it's nearly-everyone, nearly all the time.
@renata I agree 100% and this does not exclude the fediverse. For me it is very ambivalent. I enjoy it being able to discuss with people like you or @evan - this only happens with social media (including forums or mailing lists). But at the same time there is that FOMO and the feeling that I need to perform and post smart answers.
@kleisli A lot of people complain about social anxiety and loneliness, and I truly believe that the over reliance on social networks to be basically the only source of connection is the driving force behind that
You had both the ability to completely disconnect and also had to make an effort to go out and find whatever new things you wanted, things humans have done for centures.
In 10 years, we lost that. Of course our minds feel weird.
Social networkds are necessary for humans, and that is precisely what makes the abuse of "social networks" by bad actors all levels from local bully to megacorporation so pernicious.
@renata I think we got used to that circle we didn't have before social media. Even with social media platforms usually there is a hand full of closer friends we meet, call or write regularly. And before social media there was the "work circle" maybe a sports club. But there wasn't that huge fuzzy circle of "facebook friends". @evan
One of those extremely loaded questions where I'd normally say "Technically yes but there's A LOT more nuance" to most people, but "No and I hope someone spits in your coffee, good day sir" to think tanks and lobby groups.
Shortest pitch I can throw? On one hand, we NEED spaces for youth to interact with, well, anyone. On the other, profit-minded, rage-baiting, shorthand media (or even just... shorthand media like here, albeit better) isn't the right tool IMO.
Sam Clemente
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Yes, but it isn't a cut and dry, across the board answer
There are issues with social media in general with the sheer amount of access that anyone can have to an onslaught of information
But that's also an important part of allowing people to find themselves
malte
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to malte • • •malte
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to malte • • •malte
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Rachel E. S. Lösche
in reply to malte • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to malte • • •malte
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Clinton Anderson SwordForHire
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •@malte
Ever have a glass of wine?
Alcohol is toxic to every human tissue, but we put in place precautions... We rigorously regulate the production, distribution, sale, and consumption of it. We have medical interventions for its abuse. We attach social stigma to those who purposefully abuse it.
We do ZERO of those things to social media, despite knowing that, especially in terms of mental health it can be as bad or worse for especially young people than alcohol and or drug abuse.....
So, yeah. Sometimes people choose to do things that are "bad" for them, but they can make informed decisions.
Social Media has suffered few if any of the oversights, restrictions, repercussions, as other harmful activities.
It's well past time we started.
mojala
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Linza
in reply to mojala • • •Lorraine Lee
in reply to Evan Prodromou • •PapyrusBrigade likes this.
Evan Prodromou
Unknown parent • • •James M.
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
Unknown parent • • •Till Kleisli
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Kagami is they/them 🏳️⚧️
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Paul
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Thomas Cloer
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Lorraine Lee likes this.
Thomas Guyot-Sionnest
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Lorraine Lee likes this.
Lorraine Lee reshared this.
Stefan Monnier
in reply to Thomas Guyot-Sionnest • • •Max Lee
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Brecht Savelkoul
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •climbertobby
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Nathan A. Stine
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Gemma ⭐️🔰🇺🇸 🇵🇭 🎐
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •It is not that social networks exist, or that they are social that makes them unhealthy, it's algorithmic manipulation by billionaires.
I have just had the unfortunately experience these past few days of what happens when Facebook randomly decides to put my political posts in front of the eyeballs of angry white men.
Al ⁂
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Baral'heia Stormdancer ΘΔ🐲
in reply to Al ⁂ • • •川音리오@KawaneRio#8706
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •The only reason why I am here typing is because there were people who liked my tweets at Twitter.
If I didn't have SNS, I would have unalived myself at 10.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to 川音리오@KawaneRio#8706 • • •JF
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •δανσω
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •halcy 🔜
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Mark Andrew
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Rachel E. S. Lösche
in reply to Mark Andrew • • •Paul Lalonde
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Patrick - SV Apsara
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •David B.
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Yes.
Most are already unhealthy for adults, and minors have even fewer psychological tools than adults to protect themselves from the harm they cause.
So, they're even more unhealthy for minors.
django
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Olivia Vespera
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •millennial fulcrum
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •ah. I now see where the support for the privacy invasion legislation is coming from.
the idea that children should sit silent, isolated, and inert, until their 18th birthday whereupon they magically gain all the skills needed to live well is what's unhealthy for children.
just let them live their lives with unconditional agency, love, and support. I guarantee you it is better. sometimes they might go online! you are just going to have to find a way to deal with that, team.
Ursa
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Conceptually, no. An online social space isnt automatically anything but social
But as created and run currently, by people and corporate entities who design social networks to maximize engagement by outrage and do not design for healthy use?
That's bad for basically everyone, especially kids who are still learning to navigate their physical social spaces.
mattg
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to mattg • • •Poll FAQ
Evan Prodromou (Evan Prodromou's Blog)🏳️🌈🎃🇧🇷Luana🇧🇷🎃🏳️🌈
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Renata 🇨🇦🐈
Unknown parent • • •I removed myself from The Big Ones and people *don't talk to me anymore*
They don't know how to talk to me. They can't find me if it's not by looking it up on some social network.
Don't you think that's a little weird? If I delete my account here, I'm going to basically disappear.
Inderix
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •through high school both my parents worked and i was largely left on my own in the house with my 3 siblings. between the age of 13-17 i was in a lot of public discord servers and met a wide variety of people, who shared my extremely crude and childish sense of humor at that time. it was quite nice having human company, even if it was from all over the world and not down the street.
however i also had one too many experiences of being DM'd "i did it again :333" or "reply or ill really jump" when I was the ripe age of 14 sipping on root beer and eating chips.
and apparently im not alone in that experience of becoming an uncertified discord therapist because i know so many people who experienced a similar deal, or otherwise wound up in petty internet drama with The Most Insufferable People Ever.
The internet is such an unbelievably varied space that its impossible to really quantify in one number or sentence how healthy it is. It'll be a spin at the roulette table on what you find any given day on any given platform, and with every conceivable human concept available with a bash of a keyboard, anyone can access anything.
I believe that knowledge should not be constrained and social networks often are the gateway to the most up to date conversations on current events and evolving knowledge, with an equal part of rot.
Alice
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Brooke Vibber
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •David
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •StarkRG
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Chris Laprun ⏚
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Rachel E. S. Lösche
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Rachel E. S. Lösche • • •Bradley M. Kühn
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •(1/2) @evan I've always opposed sanitizing the world for kids.
They *will* get online & find stuff. I did (just w/BBS's!).
I *am* sure so-called “social media” *is* toxic for kids. Heck:it's toxic for most adults.
But age verification laws'll put 16 yr olds into business of making fake ids for 10 yr olds.
My mother read Tipper Gore's book & Destroyed all my #punk tapes.
Lars brought me his to school to listen to free.
& the censorship made me an activist for life. So, maybe upsides?🤷
#EvanPoll
(Matthew)=> 🏳️🌈🇿🇦🎮💻📖
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Folks, I know this is a heated issue, but please be respectful of other people in the comments. You can disagree without attacking people personally.
I have a hard line about telling people they are unfit to be parents. That's not an acceptable thing to say to another human being.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •dick_turpin
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •I know. I pride myself on Freedom of speech.
Dialogue is the only way we can all get along, whether we agree with each other or not. Sadly, some people don't deserve that level of respect.
I've put up with a lot of shit flung at me over the years. I'm happy to be insulted to a certain degree, be denigrated, have my words twisted, and often be lied about, but there comes a time when enough is enough, and I have to hit the Mute button.
They have to be extremely bad for me to block them.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to dick_turpin • • •dick_turpin
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Ah, the old Knee-jerk reaction, aye?
Christ, how have we managed to stay friends for eighteen years? 🤣 🤣 🤣
Evan Prodromou
in reply to dick_turpin • • •@dick_turpin I kind of feel like it's better than saying something I'll regret later.
I also regularly go through my blocklist and if I can't remember why I blocked someone, I unblock them. So it's more like a cooling-off period.
dick_turpin
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Dr Kim Foale
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Dr Kim Foale • • •Camilo
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Camilo • • •Miakoda
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Mastodon and the rest of Fedi... no, but parental discretion is advised!
Yves Van Goethem
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Clinton Anderson SwordForHire
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Rabies Girl
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Tony Hoyle
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •I struggled between yes, but and no, but.
Inherently, being part of a social group can be important esp. when you're the type who doesn't mix normally (me in my youth.. 0 friends but my ZX Spectrum.. would have killed for something like Mastodon back then).
But the way they're run by corporations with no thought for the damage their algorithms can do.. just more eyeballs means more profit.. makes them a toxic place. We need to fix that.
Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •For me, it’s a “No, but…”. I grew up using BBS (only for a short time) and then Usenet. There have always been toxic elements there, and certainly not everything was age-appropriate. So it’s also a reflection of society. And today, especially on commercial networks, that reflection of society is the attention economy and the greed for data.
Everyone has a responsibility to ensure that these networks are safe for all users. Children should not simply be shielded from them, but rather taught how to use these media. They will find a way to participate anyway.
Evan Prodromou
Unknown parent • • •william.maggos
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •the problem is "social media" algos. they intentionally fuck with us for profit. bad for everyone but kids are less prepared for manipulation and their brains are still changing. beyond the personal, taken together, they also have a societal impact.
I think staying connected to people they know IRL via "social networking" tools is great for minors. and I think a purely reverse chronological feed without ads is a better way to get news for everyone.
I hope we can make the distinction.
Masoud Abkenar
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Gavin Lux Enjoyer
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Rabbit Cohen
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Thanks to everyone for your replies here.
I think social network platforms are good for people. Connecting with people you care about, meeting new people, expressing your ideas and your creativity, sharing your daily life, learning about the vast diversity of human experience -- these are all positive things that social networking platforms can bring us.
roland reshared this.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •roland reshared this.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •I realize that this is my answer to everything, but: I think there's value in experimenting with different options, providing a full menu of different platforms, and letting parents, kids and teens make their own choices about what works for them.
Federation lets users choose the parameters that work for them -- who can find you, who can follow, who can message, what appears in the feed -- and still stay connected to the wider social web. Your rules of engagement shouldn't cut you off.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Johanna, CanCon variety
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Sean Coates
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •One big thing I've noticed with my kids vs. even a few years before that, is the social network/pressure never turns off for some of them.
Social things (good and bad, but more often bad) catch fire much faster and stay burning for much longer, when there's no mandated community-wide break between 3:30pm and 8:30am the next morning (or the weekend).
Of course we still talked to some of our friends after school when we were that age, but for them it's nearly-everyone, nearly all the time.
Evan Prodromou
Unknown parent • • •Renata 🇨🇦🐈
Unknown parent • • •@kleisli Also, performing is exhausting. Social networks train people to perform 24/7.
You take a picture but it’s not for your personal album, it’s for many likes.
You post something and keep waiting for someone else to reply, or worried about others might think.
An entire generation grew up not knowing what is having a private thought
Till Kleisli
in reply to Renata 🇨🇦🐈 • • •For me it is very ambivalent. I enjoy it being able to discuss with people like you or @evan - this only happens with social media (including forums or mailing lists). But at the same time there is that FOMO and the feeling that I need to perform and post smart answers.
Renata 🇨🇦🐈
Unknown parent • • •@kleisli A lot of people complain about social anxiety and loneliness, and I truly believe that the over reliance on social networks to be basically the only source of connection is the driving force behind that
You had both the ability to completely disconnect and also had to make an effort to go out and find whatever new things you wanted, things humans have done for centures.
In 10 years, we lost that. Of course our minds feel weird.
kit
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •No, but.
Social networkds are necessary for humans, and that is precisely what makes the abuse of "social networks" by bad actors all levels from local bully to megacorporation so pernicious.
Lorraine Lee likes this.
Till Kleisli
in reply to Renata 🇨🇦🐈 • • •Danger Bird 🪐 ✨
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •One of those extremely loaded questions where I'd normally say "Technically yes but there's A LOT more nuance" to most people, but "No and I hope someone spits in your coffee, good day sir" to think tanks and lobby groups.
Shortest pitch I can throw? On one hand, we NEED spaces for youth to interact with, well, anyone. On the other, profit-minded, rage-baiting, shorthand media (or even just... shorthand media like here, albeit better) isn't the right tool IMO.
Annelies Kamran, Ph.D.
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •@cubicgarden *yes but* most social media platforms are also unhealthy for adults.
Social networks are offline too.
Thomas Lee ✅
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •