<
https://www.techdirt.com/2024/05/22/why-jonathan-haidts-protect-the-kids-proposals-could-make-things-worse/>
"How much harm is done to children in the name of “protecting” them? Entirely
too much. What if we drive them further into dangerous corners of the internet
by cutting them off from their support networks?
Since the release of Jonathan Haidt’s book, “The Anxious Generation,” a few
months back, there has been plenty of discussion and debate about his claims
and his proposed solutions. In my own review of the book, I discussed how the
data supporting Haidt’s claims were extraordinarily weak, but spent more time
talking about how flimsy the support for his “solutions” were.
Haidt has, at other times, suggested that even if there is no evidence to
actually support his policy solutions, we should support them anyway, because
they couldn’t do any harm, and the mere chance that they might benefit kids is
worth it. As I wrote:
While it doesn’t make it directly into his latest book, while he was working
on it, Haidt responded to critics of his thesis by citing Pascal’s
Wager—that it makes more sense to believe in God than not, because the cost
of believing and being wrong is nothing. But the cost of not believing and
being wrong could be eternal damnation.
Similarly, Haidt argues that we should keep kids away from social media for
the same reason: even if he’s wrong, the “cost” is minimal.
The scariest part is that the cost of being wrong is not minimal. Indeed, it
appears to be extremely high.
If he’s wrong, it means parents, politicians, teachers, and more do not
tackle the real root causes of teenage mental health issues.
The research has shown repeatedly that social media is valuable for many
young people, especially those struggling in their local communities and
families (multiple studies highlight how LGBTQ youth rely heavily on social
media in very helpful ways). Taking that lifeline away can be damaging.
There are numerous stories of kids who relied on social media to help them
out of tricky situations, such as diagnosing a disease where doctors failed
to help.
I then went on and detailed how little Haidt seemed to understand about his own
policy proposals. At least he provided some studies to support his position
about the problem. But when it came to his policy proposals, they were totally
based on “feels” rather than facts (or data).
Similarly, Haidt is no policy expert, and it shows. In the book, he supports
policies like the “Kids Online Safety Act,” which has been condemned by
LGBTQ groups, given that the co-sponsor of the bill has admitted she
supports it to remove LGBTQ content from the internet. That’s real harm."
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
