Politicians Scapegoat Social Media While Ignoring Real Solutions
from the stop-blaming-tech-for-your-own-failings dept
Holding social media companies solely responsible for the mental health challenges faced by today’s youth is not only misguided—it’s dangerous. Misdiagnosing the problem means your solutions are going to be actively harmful.
I know that, these days especially, it seems that the thing everyone across the political aisle seems to agree on is that the internet is uniquely harmful for children, and, somehow this is all, “big tech’s fault.” And, yes, we can all point to examples of where internet companies could do better.
But, as we keep pointing out, reality is a lot more complex than the simplistic narrative that “tech is a unique evil and out to get kids.” First off, many of the underlying problems are societal problems, which the internet is merely shining a light on. Those problems are most tempting for politicians to freak out about because their existence often highlights governmental failures where all the internet is doing is shining a light on those problems.
Enter Jennifer Siebel Newsom, wife of California governor Gavin Newsom, going on a rant complaining about internet companies “failing to address social media addiction and mental health problems among young people.”
Of course, the narrative about “social media addiction” is not actually supported by the facts or data. What the data has shown, repeatedly, is that for a very small percentage of users — mainly those who are dealing with existing mental health issues, and who don’t have the support or resources they need — may turn to social media instead, and that can be problematic.
And when the tech companies try to study these things in order to fix them, their studies get falsely portrayed as “not doing anything” to fix the problems, making it that much more difficult to get the companies to do any more research to help.
So, the very framing of Siebel Newsom’s complaint is misguided, and she should (maybe) be asking her husband why California isn’t doing enough to support the cohort of students who need mental health resources and aren’t getting them.
The rest of her speech is equally misguided:
She also noted industry efforts to stymie the state’s landmark Age Appropriate Design Code — a law designed to protect children’s online privacy and safety — that has been held up in courts since the governor signed it in 2022.
“We’re sadly being held back by capitalist interests,” the first partner said. “For me, legislation is necessary if the tech companies aren’t going to be more transparent.”
It’s not “capitalist interests” that held up the AADC. It was the First Amendment of the Constitution. You know, part of the document your husband took an oath to “support and defend.”
The AADC wasn’t just blocked because of whining, but because the law itself would lead to the suppression of constitutionally protected speech, as the judge clearly explained. And that suppression of constitutionally protected speech could, in many cases, cause real harm, such as by suppressing useful information on mental health and suicide prevention for kids.
But Siebel Newsom doesn’t seem interested in actually understanding what works. She seems to just want political wins for her husband.
I recognize it’s convenient to claim that it’s just “big tech” that pointed out the constitutional flaws of the AADC, but they were just the only ones that could afford the lawsuit. There were plenty of others, myself included, who pointed out just how dangerous a law this was.
In an interview with POLITICO following the panel, Siebel Newsom called tech companies the “Wild West” and spoke to the need to protect children.
This is also nonsense. The “wild west” trope hasn’t been true in more than a decade, but it makes for a convenient scapegoat for people like Siebel Newsom trying to divert attention from the failings of her husband as California’s governor.
For what it’s worth, most of the big tech companies actually supported the AADC. They know that they’re already doing most of what it requires, and also that the law creates a moat that smaller competitors will struggle with. The idea that big tech doesn’t like the AADC may be a convenient narrative for Siebel Newsom to spread, but it’s a myth.
Siebel Newsom, during the panel, also spoke about her experience as a mother to four children between the ages of 8 and 14, who have had their own struggles with social media. At one point, she choked up recounting how the couple had to pull one of their kids out of school because of online bullying.
“Granted, we’re public figures, but what we’re seeing, sadly, are adults coming after our own children online — parents of children, and then the children mimicking it. I actually pulled my daughter from school,” she said. “It’s bad.”
That does sound bad, and I have sympathy for any family dealing with bullying. But bullying predated the internet, and it is something that lots of families and schools have dealt with for years. A CDC study from a few years back found that offline bullying at schools was noticeably more prevalent than online bullying.
Is Siebel Newsom advocating for new laws to punish schools that allowed bullying to happen on campus?
In fact, multiple studies have shown that online bullying has actually been on a massive decline over the last few years. Some attribute that to school lockdowns during COVID-19, but that seems strange, given that interactions between kids increased online due to those lockdowns.
Indeed, I’ve heard from a few researchers suggesting that the biggest success in stopping online bullying among students was simply better education. Schools are starting anti-bullying education programs much earlier, and it’s a bigger focus in curricula, which, at least, appears to be having an impact.
But sure, let’s blame tech for not magically stopping this larger societal issue.
Look, everyone wants to make sure kids are safe and not being bullied. But these politicians with simplistic answers, who immediately blame tech companies, continue to present answers that make them feel good, but do little to deal with the realities and actual complexities of the issues at play.
Filed Under: aadc, california, gavin newsom, jennifer siebold newsom, mental health, social media, teen mental health
Comments on “Politicians Scapegoat Social Media While Ignoring Real Solutions”
A Lesson in new technology...
1960′ to 1980’s
Government: ITS THE FAULT OF THIS NEW CONFANGLED TELEVISION!
Smart People: No, thats not right.
1980’s to 2000’s
Gov: ITS THEM DARN VIDEO GAMES ROTTING KIDS BRAINS!!!
GenX: Ummm…no…dumbass
2000’s to now
Gov: WE MUST NOW TELL SOCIAL MEDIA TO STOP BEING MEAN TO KIDS MENTAL STATES!!
Everyone but the Boomers: Seriously, stop yelling idiotic ideas.
Boomers: Government is finally making sense!
Re:
Don’t forget when they blamed the internet in general in the early 90s!
Re: Re:
That’s hard to forget, actually. Where do you think social media exists?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Turn It Off Kid
It’s fortunate that these rants occur almost daily. It’s an excellent segue into a Norwegian study which concludes that banning cell phones from school classrooms is a major boon for students:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4735240
Increased GPA, decreased psychological problems, and less bullying are the major benefits of banning smartphones in schools. Fewer distractions and less gossip gets results.
So what kind of content are kids accessing with smartphones? Maybe it’s not social media. I doubt it. In fairness, it might not be social media that is the exclusive problem. But we are starting to get at the root of the problem, and there does appear to be a specific (and low cost!) solution.
Re:
“In fairness, it might not be social media that is the exclusive problem.”
When have you ever been fair though?
Re:
The malicious use of social media is a symptom of the broader problems of bullying, antisocial behavior, and the acceptance of cruelty towards people deemed to be “acceptable targets”. That problem existed well before the Internet was a modern utility and it will persist without social media and mobile devices. To believe otherwise is to believe in a fairy tale.
Re:
Your connection lacks clarity and specificity. If we ban smartphones in classrooms, bullying still exists. ADHD still exists. People who are bad at math exist.
The roots of the problems of social media are human behavior. Bullying, anxiety, poor academic performance? You blame tech because otherwise the solution is messy and imperfect.
Re:
I distinctly remember my time in school from 1994-2004.
There were no fewer distractions back then, and gossip was ALWAYS a thing.
And the only thing that got “results” was endless drilling and mock exams. Results that didn’t even matter in the long run.
And this was from Singapore.
Shame we can’t turn you off, Koby.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Pink Dot me you sexy thang you!
Re: Hey did anyone notice k-dawg is still here?
You’re like the human version of crabgrass. Always there, always a pest, not really worth breaking out the spray for.
Mike has written several posts about Jonathan Haidt and his recent books that push a lot of the same narrative. I’ve been seeing his latest book being discussed/reviewed on several what I would have thought were thoughtful sites, that I can’t remember the names of right now. He was a guest on The Daily Show the other day. None of them are doing any push back on his ideas. When he talks he gives some anecdotal examples, and he ‘seems’ like he knows what he’s talking about. Until you get into the weeds about what he is suggesting are the solutions and then you see he has his head up his ass.
Re:
As soon as he was announced as the guest, I stopped watching. Why? Because nothing good can come from listening to Jonathan Haidt.
the couple had to pull one of their kids out of school because of online bullying.
Uh. What? You’re doing it wrong.
No wonder the public complaining about social media and the bad law are the way they are.
For all the finger pointing
Its like the past, Looking to Smart(?) Person that SHOULD tell us the problem, when they dont want to FIX IT. AS the #1 fix, is REAL, FULL COVERAGE MEDICAL.
The REAL Fix is coming from US. WE have to FIX IT, by knowing the problem that NEEDS to be fixed. Then HOW to FIX IT, by not pointing Fingers and Still do nothing.,
“I recognize it’s convenient to claim that it’s just “big tech” that pointed out the constitutional flaws of the AADC, but they were just the only ones that could afford the lawsuit.”
Jennifer Seibel Newsom conflated the idea that Big Tech was behind the suit, with the fact that NetChoice (a trade organization that represents the major social media companies as well as many e-commerce firms) filed the lawsuit. NetChoice recognizes the constitutional problems with most of these Internet laws, generally those where the laws conflict with the First Amendment, and challenges them where appropriate.
The Free Speech Coalition (another trade group representing the adult entertainment industry) is of the same mindset, that regulation of the Internet should not abridge First Amendment freedoms (their challenges to age verification laws, which NetChoice also challenges with regard to social media and other non-adult sites, is based on the principle that parents should be the ones keeping their kids from accessing adult content online and any age verification to access such content should be device-based, not site-based).
Re:
A principle with which I wholeheartedly concur, although others on this site have claimed otherwise. Any wonder I post as an AC?
“social media addiction” – Show me in the DSM where that is actually a thing please.
I hear a lot of lawyers and “experts” on that topic claiming it is a thing but their income depends on you believing its a thing that they can fix for cash.
Its techs fault, its techs fault!!!
Yeah that kid who racked up $20K on the ipad game… thats on the parents.
My kids on the phone all the time!!!
OMG well send it back to FB and tell them you don’t want it… oh you bought it and pay the bill??
A large portion of the evil “social media addiction” seem to be as truthful as poisoned halloween candy, serial killer clowns, the moral leaders monogamy.
Crazy idea, how about instead of accepting the simple answer that magically absolves parents & politicians of any fault in this, we look at the actual issues.
Parents who have NO idea what their kid does online, who they talk to, what sites they use, which Air National Guard employee is sharing Top Secret intel with them…
Parents who ignore the massive amount of data their child is using, but have no curiosity what they are doing to use so much & how many are running their own onlyfans for creepy incels.
You threw you kid into the middle of the ocean with no lessons in swimming, no life raft, no life vest and somehow the kid finds their way onto a cruise ship & now it is the cruise lines fault your kid got drunk & drove 100 MPH to activate a filter they heard about…
Politicians love to tell lies to make people feel better, how it isn’t their fault and it can’t possibly be the governments fault so lets get our torches and pitchforks and burn down the tech moguls house that many of the kids lied about their age to gain access to.
Now THERE is a cut-and-paste headline if ever I saw one.
“Politicians scapegoat >insert victim here< while ignoring real solutions.”
You may find yourself living in a shotgun shack….
The goal of these laws is to hurt kids. The political clout from attacking “Big Tech” is just icing on the cake.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
You erased my comment.
Not the spam filter caught it. It was posted, then you deleted it.
You weak child. That is sad, truly.
Re: Weird flex bro
Back to bragging about losing to a spam filter. With a topping of near incoherent name calling.
Re:
This is not true. It did not happen. We did not erase any of your comments, and none are in the spam filter. I just looked.
If we had deleted the comment it would be in our trash folder and it’s not there. I just looked. I just cleared out the spam filters as well. Nothing from you in there.
You must not have actually posted the comment.
Re: Re:
Why would they bother to delete your comments?
It would just play directly into your fantasy that they actually give a shit about you.
ProTip: They don’t actually give a shit about you, but the bullshit you spew regularly can’t be left unanswered, which is why you get personal responses from the owner of the site you constantly malign and accuse of being against you.
It is not entirely unheard of for posts to not happen, I’ve usually chalked it up to an IP glitch as mine sometimes changes at bothersome times.
I hit the spam filter more than most (I think), I do not accuse Mike of personally having it out for me, I put on my pretend upset face and stomp my foot & move the hell on. I do not post message after message claiming its all a plot to silence me and accuse him of having kidnapped the Lindberg baby.
Oh Mike, BTW… is the proper use crackpipe crack pipe, or crack-pipe?
Re: Re: Re: Not the person you are replying to, but
I have made posts here, seen them posted here, only to have them erased later.
Just because it hasn’t happened to you nor happen everyday, does not mean it does not happen.
Mike may not have done it, but somebody did.
Re: Re: Re:2
Losing to a 2005 blogging software that is known to have many, many issues?
It’s more likely than you think!
Re: Re: Re:2
erased or downvoted?
Re: Re: Re:3
Comment was posted. I saw it 2 hours later. 3-4 hours later it was gone like it had never been there.
Re: Re: Re:4
Did it have the text “your comment is awaiting moderation” at the bottom? Because I’ve had posts look like they went through, but had that text at the bottom of the post.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:5
No. It was held for “transition,” given blockers, then committed suicide.
Re: Re: Re:6
Oh, wow, a third “joke” about trans people. And it’s just as unfunny as the other two. Seriously, doesn’t it get tiresome to hate other people so much that you’d rather see them die than actually try to help them in a way that isn’t about making you comfortable?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:7
I’d like to see them helped, not mutilated
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:7
“Oh, wow, a third “joke” about trans people”
I’m confused. Do you want to include trannies in society or exclude them and not make jokes about them?
Re: Re: Re:4
Of all the things that did not happen, this did not happen the most.
Re: Re: Re:5
You said the same thing 7-8 years ago.
I will start taking pics.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
Like I said, I don’t think it was Mike.
My guess is Leigh. Especially if he is still living in TO. He’d be awake hours before Mike and it happened early morning EST.
Re: Re: Re:4
TO = Trauna (Toronto) aka The Big Smoke
Re: Re: Re:2
Unless it was direct spam, as in, with links and shit, this did not happen. I get that you may THINK it happened, but it did not.
Re: Re: Re:3
no links
may have contained the question, “what is a woman.”
Re: Re: Re:3
“I get that you may THINK it happened, but it did not.”
If I think I am a woman I am one though?
Therefore it happened. I saw it. You are a bigot if you say otherwise. Not to mention a transphobe.
Re:
If you’re done harassing, fuck off.
Re:
Commenters can’t delete their own comments, shit-for-brains troll.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Still the king!