How is it hypocrisy if the previous forms of media were also bad for you, Tik-Tok is just more efficient at funneling meaningless drivel down your throat?
I think its hypocritical for a generation to consider the baseline media technology at the time of their upbringing to be generally acceptable, only to turn around and declare the next media technology to be unacceptable for their children.
What situations your short attention span makes uncomfortable for you apart from things related to some sort of achievement (as perceived by your workplace, school, family, friends, etc)
I mean achievement as something that’s perceived by society, something that you don’t do for enjoyment, something to profit off of in some way (be it simple recognition or raised social status), “I will do this because people will also see it and that’s very good”. It can be the expectations of relatives, workplace, college, or you’re just doing something for the workplace or college.
I’m asking because I cannot imagine what hobbies/activities outside of performing for somebody can be negatively affected by short attention span. It’s not your problem that people are just boring and don’t treat you like a god damn human (workplace that requires you to sit and sign documents for 12 whole hours with little to no breaks, or endless inefficient meetings, for example)
It may be hypocritical, but have you considered that all of these forms of entertainment are unhealthy? The only difference is that they get more and more efficient with each generation, causing increasing levels of concern from each generation. That’s indicative of a rising trend
@STUPIDVIPGUY@aCosmicWave I’m trying and eliminating are sources of entertainment from these websites since the saturation of entertainment content is much more than educational ones now.
I think that’s generally a good argument, however the rate and level of dopamine hits from TikTok and YouTube Shorts may far surpass that of prior mediums and so actually warrant additional considerations and precautions.
Thanks! I agree with you, I just think that each technological leap up to this point has caused the level of dopamine hits to greatly surpass the prior medium (hence the viral adoption). But young brains seem to accept the new baseline and then the cycle repeats.
When I was growing up I was bombarded with articles from older people telling me how bad video games were for my attention span, how they would increase my proclivity for violence, etc. This did not prevent me from enjoying them immensely, making friends because of them, and eventually leading me to a fun career in computer science.
I suspect that will be the case with each new medium.
Such generalizing statements are blatantly untrue, hypocritical, and harmful. People don’t use social media without a reason. Everything a human does is meet their needs, both psychological and physiological. When humans resort to social media it means they resort to social interaction and whatever other needs they may have like having feelings validated, visual/audio/etc. stimulation, but that doesn’t sound sensational enough, that’s not enough to scapegoat a group of people
Ok but research indicates that it fails to actually meet their long-term needs. This is actually a really confusing take, if humans always do what meets their needs then we wouldn’t have any issues at all? We TRY to do what we think will meet them, but we’re often mistaken, and this is an example of that.
Did I say that it does meet needs long term? What was the sample? What was the methodology? What communities were they participating in? How were they participating? What were the needs? Did they have a neurodivergency? What were their surroundings like? What was their childhood like? Do they go to therapy? What therapeutic practice did they do in therapy?
Also no. Addiction happens exactly when the needs are met more than usual, hence “social media addiction”, and it’s not the social media’s fault, it’s not “TikTok Instagram bad”. It’s weaponized misconceptions about mental health that are creating this issue in the first place
How is it hypocrisy if the previous forms of media were also bad for you, Tik-Tok is just more efficient at funneling meaningless drivel down your throat?
I think its hypocritical for a generation to consider the baseline media technology at the time of their upbringing to be generally acceptable, only to turn around and declare the next media technology to be unacceptable for their children.
Fwiw I actively believe that reddit is responsible for shortening my attention span.
It is not hypocritical to call out tik tok for doing the same.
What situations your short attention span makes uncomfortable for you apart from things related to some sort of achievement (as perceived by your workplace, school, family, friends, etc)
Can you rephrase your question? Imo nearly everything can be interpreted to relate to some sort of achievement.
I mean achievement as something that’s perceived by society, something that you don’t do for enjoyment, something to profit off of in some way (be it simple recognition or raised social status), “I will do this because people will also see it and that’s very good”. It can be the expectations of relatives, workplace, college, or you’re just doing something for the workplace or college.
I’m asking because I cannot imagine what hobbies/activities outside of performing for somebody can be negatively affected by short attention span. It’s not your problem that people are just boring and don’t treat you like a god damn human (workplace that requires you to sit and sign documents for 12 whole hours with little to no breaks, or endless inefficient meetings, for example)
What if I found the type content that my generation absorbed to be a problem as well?
It may be hypocritical, but have you considered that all of these forms of entertainment are unhealthy? The only difference is that they get more and more efficient with each generation, causing increasing levels of concern from each generation. That’s indicative of a rising trend
@STUPIDVIPGUY @aCosmicWave I’m trying and eliminating are sources of entertainment from these websites since the saturation of entertainment content is much more than educational ones now.
This is a rather interesting viewpoint and I can’t really find any fault with it.
It’s mine as well, I think it has a decent chance of being right.
The media technologies are not comparable, thats where your argument falls apart.
I think that’s generally a good argument, however the rate and level of dopamine hits from TikTok and YouTube Shorts may far surpass that of prior mediums and so actually warrant additional considerations and precautions.
But then, I may just be an old man.
Do you know anything about the reward system and addiction apart from the words “serotonin” and “dopamine”? /gen
Thanks! I agree with you, I just think that each technological leap up to this point has caused the level of dopamine hits to greatly surpass the prior medium (hence the viral adoption). But young brains seem to accept the new baseline and then the cycle repeats.
When I was growing up I was bombarded with articles from older people telling me how bad video games were for my attention span, how they would increase my proclivity for violence, etc. This did not prevent me from enjoying them immensely, making friends because of them, and eventually leading me to a fun career in computer science.
I suspect that will be the case with each new medium.
Video games are interactive, not passive. You can learn a lot and sharpen your reflexes, but moderation is still key.
Such generalizing statements are blatantly untrue, hypocritical, and harmful. People don’t use social media without a reason. Everything a human does is meet their needs, both psychological and physiological. When humans resort to social media it means they resort to social interaction and whatever other needs they may have like having feelings validated, visual/audio/etc. stimulation, but that doesn’t sound sensational enough, that’s not enough to scapegoat a group of people
Ok but research indicates that it fails to actually meet their long-term needs. This is actually a really confusing take, if humans always do what meets their needs then we wouldn’t have any issues at all? We TRY to do what we think will meet them, but we’re often mistaken, and this is an example of that.
Did I say that it does meet needs long term? What was the sample? What was the methodology? What communities were they participating in? How were they participating? What were the needs? Did they have a neurodivergency? What were their surroundings like? What was their childhood like? Do they go to therapy? What therapeutic practice did they do in therapy?
Also no. Addiction happens exactly when the needs are met more than usual, hence “social media addiction”, and it’s not the social media’s fault, it’s not “TikTok Instagram bad”. It’s weaponized misconceptions about mental health that are creating this issue in the first place
Edit: PSA - more than usual does not mean enough