Given that essentially every young person uses social media, I don't see how there can be research showing a causal link - how can you establish causality when there's no control group?
If you'd read this [0], which was the first result for "young people social media use" then you'd know that in Germany, for example only 52% use social media, Poland (58%), Czech Republic (56%), France (70%), Netherlands (65%), India (31%).
At least one third of the global population under 16 yo do not use social media. There's your control group.
[0] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/04/02/8-charts-...
what is the point of the statement if you call someone a liar, claim that there exists material to prove the lie and then say, that you will not link to this material?.
I'd like you to show some too.
Obviously you won't be able to refute what I said, because there are no papers out there that show there isn't a causal link between social media use and harms to mental health. That would be asking the impossible. But there is a massive and no longer ignorable body of work out there saying indeed there are direct causal links between social media use and mental harms. And Zuck just pretended that doesn't exist.
You know, I was actually hoping someone smarter and with more time than me would come back with something I'd missed.
Mark Zuckerberg stood up in front of a room full of grieving mothers and gave a limp, fake apology that made them burst into tears. His sheer lack of humanity and emotional disconnect with other humans could hardly be clearer.
"""
"The existing body of scientific work has not shown a causal link
between using social media and young people having worse mental
health," Zuckerberg told the crowded room.
Lori Schott, a bereaved mother from Colorado, said she cried when
she heard Zuckerberg’s comments.
"""
My point is less emotional. Given the preponderance of evidence against Zickerbergs comments, he lied.
So, above I said that means Mark Zuckerberg just lied to congress and that makes him a criminal in the US right? Whether under oath or not.
That's why I was downvoted. Nothing to do with encouraging you to do a simple search, which you could have done in the time it took you to write a snarky reply.
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/feb/01/parents-tech-c...
Whenever I see people saying "no, I will not google that for you, please do your own homework" they basically take a grenade to whatever argument is being made, agreeable nor not.
No ... YOU ... cite your sources if you wish to communicate a fact-backed point.
Also the new research is coming in so fast it's hard to keep track of. I'm really hoping some people will google that for me too, and I might learn some new ones.
According to Guardian (UK)
Four hours doesn't seem like much. My students can sleep through a 4 hour lecture! If so, this headline is a distraction from the issues at hand. Paedophilia is not what is primarily being discussed here. It's more generally that children are harmed by social media. And as far as I am concerned that is a solid fact. Zuck is an outright liar. There are now mountains of exceptionally good research showing a solid causal link between social media use and negative mental health impacts on young people (no, I will not google that for you, please do your own homework). Of course, because CSAM, while abhorrent, is the perfect distraction from the problem that your entire platform is socially corrosive.[0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/live/2024/jan/31/cong...