Re:Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media a...
by fsflover on Thursday November 28, 2024 @05:14PM
(#42268901)
> I'd like to see something examining the effects of those behaviors on the population.
In the testimony, they explain it:
We took a page from Big Tobacco’s playbook, working to make our offering addictive at the outset.
Allowing for misinformation, conspiracy theories, and fake news to flourish were like Big Tobacco’s bronchodilators, which allowed the cigarette smoke to cover more surface area of the lungs.
https://web.archive.org/web/20210318063530/https://energycom...
Re:Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media a...
by cscurmudgeon on Thursday November 28, 2024 @10:06PM
(#42270443)
Still no science though. One exec's views in a large company doesn't equal science.
If exec's views are science/truth. Then I bet you would have found execs in tobacco companies who thought they were doing good.
Re:Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media a...
by fsflover on Friday November 29, 2024 @04:25AM
(#42272493)
True, it's not science. It is however the intention.
Re:Australia: Kids under 16 to be banned from social media a...
by hellojesus on Sunday December 01, 2024 @02:32AM
(#42286869)
> Allowing for misinformation, conspiracy theories, and fake news to flourish...
I don't understand why people are so against this? Isn't it possible that people do research to determine the validity of what they read online?
I will say that the lengths the executive goes to to compare social media with tobacco degrade the quality of the argument in my opinion; science tends to ask the question and then seek the answer. Arguments like this seem to start with the answer (it's like Big Tobacco) and then construct the argument accordingly.