Meta really wants you to believe social media addiction is 'not a real thing'

Comments

• devolution@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Meta also wants you to believe it doesn’t enble dictators too.

  source
• D_C@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

  I’ve heard ferociously burning coal and oil is actually good for the climate, AND that smoking meth will give you the ability to make the perfect pizza.

  source
• TwodogsFighting@lemdro.id ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Cigarettes are healthy!

  source

  • Derpenheim@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    Now with asbestos filters! Image

    source

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      Wait, trying to remove nicotine‽ I may have only smoked a few times, but isn’t that the part that you smoke to get?

      source
  • ICastFist@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Now with extra radium for extra health!

    Image

    source
• xSikes@feddit.online ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  If it not addictive then why is it addictive?

  source

  • klymilark@herbicide.fallcounty.omg.lol ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    If it’s not addictive then why have they said they’re drug pushers in internal messages that have been subpoena’d?

    source
• iterable@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

  Deleted on socials years ago. Taken a very long time to get my brain to balance back out. Will worth it though. Save your images if you want then delete them all.

  source
• Dojan@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  They want you to believe that it isn’t a thing but they also know it is a thing and definitely have internal documents and conversations talking about how to get more people addicted.

  Fucking hope they die.

  source
• BenderRodriguez@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I have had no problem leaving their platforms and never looking bad. Leaving reddit was harder for me. I still go back sometimes when I need advice in niche communities. Lemmy is like the Non-Alcoholic Beer for reddit.

  source

  • jaybone@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Tbf, Lemmy is addictive too. But I can feel much better about it than Reddit.

    Facebook was relatively easy to quit. I still have an account there. And maybe log in once every other year if I need to find an old friend’s birthday or something like that.

    source

    • BenderRodriguez@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I agree it’s addictive, but the outrage algorithm is toned down and easy to block.

      source
  • Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    We’re slowly snowballing some of them here, luckily :)

    source
• supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Maybe, but I think they have no problem with regulatory capture being added to cement their dominance under the guise of protecting kids…

  source
• jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  On December 15, 1953, led by Paul Hahn, the head of American Tobacco, the six major tobacco companies (American Tobacco Co., R. J. Reynolds, Philip Morris, Benson & Hedges, U.S. Tobacco Co., and Brown & Williamson) met with public relations company Hill & Knowlton in New York City to create an advertisement that would assuage the public’s fears and create a false sense of security in order to regain the public’s confidence in the tobacco industry.[12] Hill and Knowlton’s president, John W. Hill, realized that simply denying the health risks would not be enough to convince the public. Instead, a more effective method would be to create a major scientific controversy in which the scientifically established link between smoking tobacco and lung cancer would appear not to be conclusively known.[13]

  The tobacco companies fought against the emerging science by producing their own science, which suggested that existing science was incomplete and that the industry was not motivated by self-interest.[11] With the creation of the Tobacco Industry Research Committee, headed by accomplished scientist C.C. Little, the tobacco companies manufactured doubt and turned scientific findings into a topic of debate. The recruitment of credentialed scientists like Little who were skeptics was a crucial aspect of the tobacco companies’ social engineering plan to establish credibility against anti-smoking reports. By amplifying the voices of a few skeptical scientists, the industry created an illusion that the larger scientific community had not reached a conclusive agreement on the link between smoking and cancer.[11]

  Internal documents released through whistleblowers and litigation, such as the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement, reveal that while advertisements like A Frank Statement made tobacco companies appear to be responsible and concerned for the health of their consumers, in reality, they were deceiving the public into believing that smoking did not have health risks. The whole project was aimed at protecting the tobacco companies’ images of glamour and all-American individualism at the cost of the public’s health.[14]

  A Frank Statement

  source
• thisbenzingring@lemmy.today ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  History doesn’t repeat but it often rhymes…

  …ucsf.edu/tobacco-ceo-statement-to-congress

  source
• MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  The leaks confirming that they made their algorithms as addictive as possible on purpose and that they knew that it increases teen depression and suicide rate, they don’t count?

  source
• Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I can’t really think of a more obvious headline. Why would anyone even click on this?

  source