• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    What does “on tiktok” mean?

    Unsupervised with their own accounts? I feel like that’s difficult to believe. Watching a few tiktoks before dinner with their parents? That doesn’t really strike me as a problem.

    While I don’t entirely disagree with the author, I feel like this is a far too superficial look at what is a larger societal problem: young people have checked out.

    He makes the argument that mental health is in decline, and I’m not sure if that’s true or we’ve just removed the stigma from therapy… But of more concern to me is that young people just DGAF, and I think that’s because older generations have left nothing for younger generations to inherit, besides ruin. Kids 5-7 aren’t gonna understand that, but they’re gonna pick up the vibes from their parents.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think its difficult to imagine 30% of 5 to 7s with their own phones on tiktok nearly all the time.

      Raising kids is hard, especially when youre poor and stressed out or tired all the time, its waaay easier to just get them a phone.

      The number of people I’ve met in the last couple of years? Yeah, I live amongst the poors, the abusive parents and single moms and drunk/drug addicted dads… all their kids either have their own phones or the family has one for all the kids, who basically fight over it and get smacked by a parent or older sibling when theyre being too rowdy.

      A few weeks ago I was walking, puffing on a nicotine vape. A school bus pulls up and drops off what could not have been older than 2nd graders, who began hounding me: Lemme hit that wax bro, Share your wax!

      These are those 5 to 7s that are on TikTok, or close to it. I didnt even realize what Wax was at first, literally had to scurry home and lookup that wax is now the term for basically dab pens.

      So yeah, theres huge segments of the population where 7 year olds want a highly concentrated dose of MJ from a literal random person theyve never seen before.

      Devo: It’s a beautiful world we live in… for you, but not for me.

      • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean, that’s kind of my point - in situations like that, it seems like using Tiktok is small potatoes compared to the more significant issues that’d cause problem behavior. The Tiktok consumption is just another symptom, and if it wasn’t tiktok it’d be some other escape mechanism.

        To me, the article seems lazy, complaining about a superficial problem without spending effort to even consider or mention underlying root causes that could give rise to it and must be solved first.

        And to be clear I’m not blaming the parents, they’re not the “root cause” I’m talking about. They’re victims too, in large part. They and their kids are stuck in a harmful cycle, and people with the ability to break that cycle are unwilling to do so.

        • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You explicitly said you couldnt imagine 30% of 5-7 year olds having essentially unfettered access to TikTok, and you said the TikTok problem is a symptom of general mental health decline in youths.

          You did not say your point was that 30% of 5-7s are using TikTok habitually, you expressed incredulity to this, to which I responded.

          Anyway, you want a root cause?

          Poverty, drug addiction, poor parenting.

          Yeah, I am going to blame the parents, at least partially.

          Oh you have kids and you are not able to actually raise them, hand them off to TikTok instead? You shouldn’t have had kids you can’t actually raise.

          Obviously, this would happen a lot less if maybe we redistributed some wealth from the top to the bottom, actually had an economy and society that allowed for all people to live well.

          Sure the article is superficial in the sense it isnt exploring root causes, but it doesnt really purport to try. That would probably end up being a completely different and much more complex piece of writing.

          Further, this is honest-broker, a website for basically well to do yuppies who were born into connections and managed to maintain the socio economic strata they were born into, where they fret about how the poors are poor because theyre stupid, and minutiae about their investments.

          What did you expect?

          • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I know I shouldn’t expect much from a site like that, but since it’s shared here I felt like I should shine a little light on the deeper issues.

            This kind of superficial “journalism” rage-baiting boomers for clicks is really frustrating to me. Shit like this is brain-rot at least as bad as Tiktok is. It has always existed, but the extent to which it has replaced actual analysis and investigation is depressing.

            Yes, the parents are partially at fault, of course. But as you indicated, there are significant societal pressures that force families into dynamics like this and it’s not realistic to expect an overwhelming majority to be able to resist it, alone. And since we’re not about to engage in class-based eugenics, it’s up to society to give them a serviceable ladder to climb out of their situation.

            So, TLDR; I wanted to shine a light on deeper issues, so that people don’t think that this is solely a moral failing of parents, and that they DO understand that we have a collective responsibility to help families.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How many kids have been on TV for decades?

    Why the assumption that this is worse and not better?

    Why do the same people who profited from destroying the planet expect kids to be both aware and “happy”?

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Short form video, infinite scrolling, and an algorithm that shows you videos based on your habits is a lot different than watching cartoons with random ads sprinkled in. Even as a kid commercial breaks were there to get up, use the bathroom, and get a snack/drink.

  • profdc9@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    You would think that with all those kids watching, Xi would lean into the whole Winnie the Pooh resemblance.

    • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah, social media is like a hydra. Another “TikTok” will just be born from the ban.

      Nothing is changing drastically until we have better data protection laws.

      • anon987@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ban all Chinese/Russian social media companies. GG EZ.

        Edit: sorry my bad, I didn’t realize you were one of the people that thinks all social media is the same.

        You realize that tik toks sole purpose is to brainwash western youth right? This is propaganda 101.

  • The Menemen!@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I managed to almost completly keep my children away from it for now (8 and 10). But it is a struggle. And I will soon lose that struggle. So many children at age 8 or 9 have smartphones for fs sake.

    I plan to slowly introduce them to stuff like this, so they will be able to deal with it. I did so rather successfully with the other bullshit, like Roblox. They are only allowed to play it when I am in the room, and I check that they follow that rule (they do).

    Feels like walking on the edge though. Still unsure when to open the TikTok thing. Too early is bad, but too late and they will somehow already he on tiktok and I just don’t know about it.

    • tmcgh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you have any tips? My kids are still pretty young (3 and 2) and I really want to avoid them having acess to these sorts of things.

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        the main thing for you is to stay off your phone as well. Kids watch their parents closely and humans have an in built need for “fairness”, if they see you addicted to it they will never stop wanting to do the same.

        • tmcgh@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yea, that makes sense. Whenever I’m home from work, I make sure the phone goes on the counter. Thankfully, I’m not into social media all that much.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      my siblings managed to keep their kids away from smartphones until 4th grade. And even that was a struggle.

      sadly it just falls into the camp of ‘everyone else is doing it’. and if your kid isn’t they will be socially ostracized.

      • tamal3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Some kids also get obsessive about phones once they get one, or obsessed with other people’s phones until then.

  • biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I turned out perfectly fine without a phone until age 15, and I’m 17 now, I don’t really use social media other than reddit, Lemmy and YouTube on my phone and I barely use it, since I’m more likely to use my iPad at home exclusively.

    I feel as though more parents need to do the same mine did, restrict access to smartphones until ages the kid is more likely to explore the world more, specifically for safety, but still teach them to concentrate on stops while on public transport, on where they walk, etc. and not use their phone on the go apart from when time is able to pass and be stationary.

    I cringe at the fact kids a third or less my age are allowed phones, I shouldn’t even be allowed since my brain is still developing, i cant imagine the levels of braindead these children will be when they get to my age, since people my age are already horrific enough…

    • 257m@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was given a phone quite young but completely discarded it after I bought myself a thinkpad. No need for it when I can be comfortable on my Arch setup. I think the amount of brain damage could be severely reduced if they only had access to a family PC or something. Most kids probably wouldn’t even touch the PC until way later.

    • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why would using a phone affect brain development negatively? We aren’t talking about children sniffing Ketamine or drinking a fifth of vodka here.

      • biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        well since social media can affect attention spans negatively, as I’ve observed with myself recently, I don’t think the effects of such would translate positively into social or educational circumstances, arguably the most needed situations in a child’s life at that time, even if they are almost an adult.

        sure, alcohol and drugs do still affect a child quite intensely, though I’m saying that, is social media and the endless dopamine harvesting NOT a drug? if you think about it, it extracts, makes a person want to come back for more, causing addiction, further extracting more, losing its effectiveness and making it almost impossible to quit from there.

        people may say it isn’t addictive, but its just that it isn’t as noticeable since it is a society-wide phenomena which is seen as positive.

        • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          sure, alcohol and drugs do still affect a child quite intensely, though I’m saying that, is social media and the endless dopamine harvesting NOT a drug? if you think about it, it extracts, makes a person want to come back for more, causing addiction, further extracting more, losing its effectiveness and making it almost impossible to quit from there.

          I don’t think you understand what drugs are or can do. They don’t all just blindly increase dopamine. They have many other effects on the mind and body that social media does not. This whole concept of dopamine detoxes and addiction = dopamine needs to die too. It’s not based on solid scientific understanding as addiction is far more complex than this and comes in multiple, separate forms. Even drugs like amphetamines that primarily interact with the dopamine system don’t always lead to addiction (ask anyone with experience of ADHD meds). Thinking dopamine is only about addiction and vice versa is like thinking electricity is only for heating and that all heating must be done using electricty.

          Raising children without access to the internet is both backwards for their education and actively dangerous. The internet has allowed minors in bad situations to escape or get help multiple times. It’s also made people realise their parents or guardians are insane or abusive including those who are members of dangerous religions and cults, are homophobic, or are abusive for other reasons. School in some countries is also packed full of propaganda, and even when it isn’t they can’t always help and are sometimes a source of abuse themselves. Restricting access to information isn’t a good thing.

          • biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            no, I’m not confused at all, I am meaning that the smartphone is the most accessible way to utilise social media, meaning due to its formfactor, it is the most convenient way to access it.

            are you more likely to use a desktop PC using android x86 or use a smartphone? its almost like using a smartwatch to use Photoshop, its not the same as using a desktop, you know what I mean?

            • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              You are not a clever man.

              If you were in any way correct, we should be banning cars and trucks from the USA, because they’re the most accessible way drugs are transported. To stop drugs, we should ban cars. Cars are making it far too easy to get that nose candy.

              Yeah, no. Hardware has nothing to do with this.

              (I’m not even going to start with how insane your mentioning android x86 is; like somehow that esoteric version of an OS has something to do with social media. I’m guessing you think everything uses apps, and social media doesn’t run through web pages?)

            • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You don’t need to run Android x86 to access a social media site on a computer. What are you talking about?

                • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  except they don’t have the same software. Phones use ARM, not x86.

                  (amusingly, if you had just said “Android”, you would have seemed less insane. still insane, since you could have just said ‘linux’, but less. But even saying that would still make you insane, since the operating system isn’t the social media, and isn’t what you were talking about.)

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Socialization is a slow process. Many people who have good families and rich environments still have problems learning how to have face to face conversations. Look how many people on this site talk about not wanting to have a conversation over the phone or talk to a stranger in a shop.

        • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          What does this have to do with smartphones and the internet? The internet is a means of gathering information first, and a form of communication second. I don’t get what socialization has to do with the first one. If you want people to be comfortable communicating on the internet (or via phone or whatever) then presumably they need to start earlier.

          As for people struggling with phones, that’s because a) lots of people here are autistic, and b) voice phones are not an ideal form of communication anyway. Either way the answer is practice, not shying away from the problem.

          • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            the answer is practice,

            There are only so many hours in the day. If a child spends eight hours a day glued to the phone, they aren’t going to learn social skills.

            • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay first who said eight hours? I am not saying there shouldn’t be limits, just that banning the internet completely is a bad idea. Second communicating with technology is an essential social skill in itself, and being able to use technology and apply critical thinking to things you read is absolutely essential. Lots of people work from home using technology. Almost everyone will have to use technology to do research e.g. in college.

              • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Socialization is a slow process. Many people who have good families and rich environments still have problems learning how to have face to face conversations. Look how many people on this site talk about not wanting to have a conversation over the phone or talk to a stranger in a shop.

                That’s my original comment. Never said anything about banning the internet.

                • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes in a thread about banning kids from having smartphones, which are the main way people access the internetwork nowadays.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      …which starts with P which rhymes with T which stands for trouble.

      Mothers of River City is your son starting to buckle his knickerbockers below the knee?

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The TikTok van isn’t bad, it’s great for humanity, it’s great for kids.

    Can we now do the same with Instagram and Facebook and the likes? Basically all of social media?

    Can we also please start banning kids from the Internet now? Since 20 years ago I’ve been saying that kids under 14-16 should not be on the Internet, or if they do, with monitoring and very limited time and access. The Internet is NOT a healthy place for kids. Hell, today they Internet isn’t a healthy place for adults, but that is a different story.

    I hate desantis, but that Florida kids and social media ban is great

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can we now do the same with Instagram and Facebook and the likes? Basically all of social media?

      No. In fact, we’re going to gear up our marketing campaigns for IG and YT so that we can reroute all that profitable children’s traffic to a Good American Liberty Loving Social Media Company.

      Can we also please start banning kids from the Internet now? Since 20 years ago I’ve been saying that kids under 14-16 should not be on the Internet

      I can’t imagine how this would be enforced, much less whether arbitrarily cutting kids off from what will (let’s face it) be an essential part of their lives as adults is actually good for them.

      To pull from an old XKCD, simply giving people a novel form of communication isn’t what’s bad for them.

      This shit is what’s bad for them

      And you need to moderate content in order to avoid this sort of shit. Simply banning it all makes about as much sense as banning your kids from looking at magazines, because Playbook and Heavy Metal exist.

      I hate desantis, but that Florida kids and social media ban is great

      If you consider how Florida actually enforces its laws, I think what you’ll find its actually really awful. You’re going to have a bunch of lower-middle class parents and teachers getting random filings against them for things they have very little control over.

      • spez_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        We need to ban the internet for select communities. Starting from those who are under the age 25. Other properties should be selected too eventually.

      • androogee (they/she)@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you consider how Florida actually enforces its laws, I think what you’ll find its actually really awful.

        And like everything that a Republican does, despite claims to “protect children” or “uphold family values” or want “small government”, the only actual effect will be massive government overreach into private homes and lives.

    • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s not a ban. It’s highly likely China will allow Tiktok to split off a USA version before the deadline is up, if they don’t get it tossed in court. TikTok isn’t going anywhere.

  • theherk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not completely convinced. It is possible but sounds a bit high to me. It is based on a survey of less than 3k parents, and although I found the BBC article, it doesn’t seem to link to the actual source. It is therefore difficult to take this too seriously without seeing exactly who was interviewed and how the questions were worded.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s probably not that bad, but I wouldn’t be surprised just based on anecdotal experience.

      I’m a provider at a children’s hospital and phones have always been an issue during appointments. Before, it was mostly an issue with getting parents to pay attention or answer questions during the evaluation.

      However since COVID, we’ve noticed a large increase of parents using tablets and phones as a constant babysitter. These children are so emotionally attached to their screens that they will tantrum until they have access to their screen again.

  • daltotron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I dunno I’m just gonna drop a 50 minute video link on this one and bounce, 'cause if I chronically post my dogshit opinions every time one of these boomer ass articles gets posted here and gets upvoted a million times by the masturbatory elder millennial ex-redditor linux userbase, then I’m gonna be here for a fuckin eternity

  • Hal-5700X@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The next generation is so fucked. Wait…they be the ones who take care of me in the old person home. I’m fucked as will.