Are social networks unhealthy for minors?

[hellomiakoda@pdx.social]

@evan
Twitter and Facebook - Yes, absolutely.
Mastodon and the rest of Fedi... no, but parental discretion is advised!

[starkrg@myside-yourside.net]

@evan 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.

[metacosm@mastodon.social]

@evan @n1k0 for that matter, they’re also unhealthy for adults… said he, while posting on the very thing he described as unhealthy.

[yvg@indieweb.social]

@evan 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.

[n1k0@mamot.fr]

@metacosm @evan the more I think about it, the more I find social networks are like alcohol

highly addictive, makes you dependent
bad for your mental health
makes you see you things and turn you violent
makes you DUI, crash a car and kill people
rehab exists
…so children should never use it

mastodon is probably the lightest beer of social networks, but still very dangerous and we should all be very careful indeed

[kleisli@mastodon.social]

@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.

[sweet_as_candi@void.lgbt]

@evan 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.

[kleisli@mastodon.social]

@renata Thinking about it, the last platform that was a place to be connected to friends for me was the early facebook. Twitter, Instagram and now the Fediverse were always more information, public discussion and entertainment platforms. @evan

[monnier@oldbytes.space]

@dermoth @evan I agree except for the extraneous last two words. Should we rename GAFAM to SC (surveillance capitalism)?

[resl@mas.to]

@evan Wow, there are people who reply no to this! Fascinating... I'll chalk that up to people conflating "social network" with "social media" I guess...

[evan@cosocial.ca]

@resl what's the difference?

[resl@mas.to]

@malte @evan 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.

[bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org]

(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

[resl@mas.to]

@spraoi @evan I hope you don't have kids. How could you possibly protect them from... almost everything?

[clintonanderson@universeodon.com]

@evan

And everyone else too

[renata@cosocial.ca]

@kleisli @evan Yes.

I deleted my instagram January 1st and, initially, I missed my computer connections but what I noticed as the time went by was that I didn’t feel this urge to photograph curated pictures anymore. I still take lots of pictures every day of things I see, but they’re mine so I don’t care if they’re not perfect.

I also have a handwritten journal, on paper, so I can write for myself.

Doing things for yourself is good, man.

[mdstevens0612@mas.to]

@evan 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.

[clintonanderson@universeodon.com]

@evan @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.

[evan@cosocial.ca]

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.

[dermoth@jasette.facil.services]

@monnier @evan I never said it was unhealthy only for minors.

I believe the poll is about the recent bans, and those wouldn't apply to adults, just like we don't ban alcohol for adults even though it's unhealthy for everyone.

There is probably also an unlimited number of things you can replace GAFAM with, but it's also going off topic, I'm only clarifying why I responded no to the poll