He’s right. Clinical addiction has nothing to do with how much you do something, it has to do with how much it causes problems in your life. I know everyone on Lemmy is tripping over their own hard ons to kill corporations, but there are people using lemmy 16 hours a day and if laws are passed to fight Internet addiction, they will not specifically target corporations. We all go down together. Just ask the creator of Urban Dead.
Comment on Instagram boss: 16 hours of daily use is not addiction
XLE@piefed.social 1 day agoThe title is accurate.
He was asked if it was an addiction, and he repeatedly used technicalities and weaseley language to refuse to admit it.
“It’s important to differentiate between clinical addiction and problematic use,” [Instagram head Adam Mosseri] added.
“I’m sure I’ve said that I’ve been addicted to a Netflix show when I binged it really late one night, but I don’t think it’s the same thing as clinical addiction.”
Yet, Mosseri repeatedly said he was not an expert in addiction in response to Lanier’s questioning.
lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
CosmoNova@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
I guess we could chalk it up to bad journalism because the example was purely anecdotal. It‘s frustrating for sure.
maturelemontree@lemmy.zip 22 hours ago
That still sounds misleading. He was not speaking for 16 hours of use which is what the headline suggests. As other has stated, I hope those companies crumble but I think honesty is important, not sensationalization.
XLE@piefed.social 22 hours ago
I fear for the future of reading comprehension. The article gives people multiple paragraphs of context to understand addiction as what is being talked about. I don’t expect the word to be wedged into every sentence about the same topic.
But I do find it much more concerning that Analog appointed himself judge of bad articles, then either accidentally or intentionally omitted these multiple paragraphs.
Ulrich@feddit.org 21 hours ago
I fear for the future of reading comprehension
I fear for it currently if you think it’s okay to make up things people said and put it in a headline.
lmmarsano@group.lt 15 hours ago
see
Even if a nonexpert claims something is clinical addiction, they’re a nonexpert & their word is meaningless. For a credible statement, they’ll need to admit relevant evidence instead of ask a nonexpert.
Imagine being asked for a medical diagnosis when you’re not a qualified physician. It’s perfectly fair to point out you’re not an expert on the matter & point out your awareness of distinctions between imprecise conventional language & precise, scientific definitions.
No one is obligated to volunteer dubious claims to antagonize themselves on the stand just because you want them to.
XLE@piefed.social 15 hours ago
Pam Bondi, is that you?