I deleted social media (besides linkedin) three months ago. I have lacked the will to cleanse myself from this vice for years, even though it had often consumed my time, and I could tell that social media was making me angrier and causing poor effects on my attention span. I justified staying online by telling myself that I’d be less connected to friends I don’t see regularly, less plugged into the news, and miss out on social or local events. Since being off social media, these concerns have proven unfounded or strongly outweighed by the benefits.
The last three months have been among the most peaceful of my life, amidst a busy school, work, and family balance. I am more present with the people I do see regularly and don’t miss updates on loose connections. I read better news sources and have a more comprehensive understanding of current events, and I have less FOMO (fear of missing out) on things happening around me. With that context, here is my data-backed pitch to you to delete social media.
I understand that the poor and even dangerous effects of social media have been widely written about, but as Governor Cox has said, “however much you hate social media, you do not hate it enough.” Social media companies are the large cigarette companies of our day. They profit from a severe public health crisis, and intervention is necessary.
“The Facebook Papers,” which were leaked internal documents in 2021, cemented the claim that Meta puts profits over the public good [1]. The Wall Street Journal did incredible journalism work to comb through these documents and find what Meta knew internally, and most importantly, what they chose to ignore, or even weaponize.
Researchers at Instagram found and posted to an internal message board that “thirty-two percent of teen girls said that when they felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse.” The year before this internal message post, researchers also posted that “we make body image issues worse for one in three teen girls [2].” The internal documents prove that Facebook has downplayed these issues to the public and made minimal efforts to address them on the app. Meta used data proving that teen girls were suffering at the hands of their product to continue to monetize their insecurities by keeping them on the app.
The Facebook papers also show that Meta knew about the addictive effects that social media has on kids. We all know, internally, that spending hours scrolling is bad, yet we continue to do it (currently trying to quit YouTube Shorts).
One Instagram researcher said, “teens told us that they don't like the amount of time they spend on the app but feel like they have to be present… They often feel 'addicted' and know that what they're seeing is bad for their mental health, but feel unable to stop themselves." These researchers also concluded that “teens regularly reported wanting to spend less time on Instagram, but lacked the self-control to do so.” In reaction to this section of the Facebook papers, Senator Richard Blumenthal said, “Facebook seems to be taking a page from the textbook of Big Tobacco– targeting teens with potentially dangerous products while masking the science in public."
Teens are currently spending an average of 4.8 hours per day on social media. The average teen spends 31% of their average waking time on social media [3]. This excludes other forms of screen time, like watching TV, gaming, etc. This will always be extremely profitable. Last quarter, Meta made over $59 billion in revenue [4]. Meta knows that many of us want to quit, but because we are their cash cows, they continue to push addictive algorithms. They feed us rage bait, targeted advertising based on extremely specific and data-mined information, and utilize bottomless short-form videos to keep us hooked. Quitting is especially difficult for adolescents and children, whose brains are particularly malleable.
Another critical aspect of child and adolescent health and development is attention span. I have felt these effects personally. I remember being at a social function and feeling like I needed to take a “scroll break” to recharge. I believe my social attention span has been damaged, particularly by short-form video content like TikTok and Instagram Reels.
Many share this sentiment and have experienced similar attention span issues. The research also shows this. Short-form videos are technologically programmed to addict adolescents because of their “bottomless” design and targeted algorithms. The list of causally related harms from short-form content includes: poor vision, decreased physical fitness, emotional regulation problems, and reduced feelings of well-being [5]. Academic procrastination is directly affected, and student attentional control is indirectly affected by short-form video content [6]. Short-form video addiction has even been found to cause suicide [7].
This doomsday-type list comes from peer-reviewed, academic studies. It’s not just a list of hypothetical correlations- it’s causational relationships between short-form video addiction and negative health outcomes.
Meta is Marlboro repackaged. Today, everyone knows that smoking is bad for you, and cigarette use is astronomically down since its peak in the 60s. But people just didn’t stop smoking. It was preceded by research that linked smoking to lung cancer, and was then followed up with litigation, legislative excise taxes, and regulation. We must pull all of these levers to protect the public from what research shows to be serious harms caused by social media.
Over 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits to hold Meta accountable for the harm that they have caused. It was the lawsuit in California that compelled the release of the Facebook Papers and proved that Meta acted against the interests of the public while withholding information.
I am writing this article just a day after New Mexico won its lawsuit, with a jury concluding that Meta had violated state law by harming children’s mental health and enabling child predators. Meta was ordered to pay $375 million in damages. The jurors heard testimonies from whistleblowers and former executives, and reviewed internal correspondence that glaringly proved that Meta failed to adequately protect children from predators and sextortion [8]. Utah is part of a broad coalition of states suing Meta for its harmful effects on kids [9]. As these internal documents have been made available via litigation, it has become strikingly clear that social media, and particularly Meta, is a public health and safety issue.
Regulating social media companies can be extremely difficult. The First Amendment largely prevents regulating speech on social media, and something like the social media ban in Australia for kids under 16 would likely be found unconstitutional here in the U.S. Age verifications have been successfully passed in some states, but minors can often easily bypass these verifications. The thing that’s so savvy about the Australian ban is that social media companies are the ones found liable for minor social media use, not the kids or parents themselves. They are subject to a fee if minors are using their platforms, thus incentivizing them to create sufficient barriers to entry [10]. This Australian law is the best-case scenario, but a ban of this nature faces a serious uphill constitutional battle.
Excise taxes were incredibly effective in deterring smoking and could be used in the context of social media. The Internet Tax Freedom Act (IFTA) prevents taxing digital advertising differently from other types of physical advertisements [11]. Numerous states, including Utah, have started taxing “targeted advertising [12].” This type of advertising can apply to specific physical types of advertising, but also applies to the data-mined, targeted advertising that social media platforms profit from. While I would support repealing ITFA, targeted advertising taxes are a reasonable starting point. Without the constraints of ITFA, however, social media companies could be subject to large excise taxes that could reduce profitability and make this exploitative business less lucrative.
I am hopeful that the government and the private sector will pull the necessary levers to hold big social media companies accountable. But what can lay people do? Most of us don't hold political office, run huge social media platforms, nor are we lawyers in a capacity to sue for change. But I still think there are things we can do to fight the harmful effects of social media. It starts with getting off social media ourselves. Sincerely ask yourself if there are any genuine, legitimate reasons for you to be on a platform that carries such loaded effects. For a small group of business owners, being on social media really is necessary. I’m sympathetic to that. But content can be limited to business purposes only. As parents or future parents, we can also create strict social media limits (or bans) with our kids. Their development will be much healthier, and we can be the enforcers that the government can’t be.
My last argument is that we need to stop idolizing influencers. I argue that influencers are not creating positive change, even if they genuinely want to do so. I used to find myself listening to faith-based content creators more than the time I actually spend in the scriptures or praying. Lifestyle influencers often showcase a beautiful but idyllic and totally unrealistic lifestyle that promotes comparison and robs joy. Clothing influencers promote overconsumerism instead of contentment and sustainability. And lastly, influencers that “keep it real” puzzle me.
We really should all know less about each other. I understand the sentiment that some influencers want to capture a more realistic version of their lives, rather than an exclusive highlight reel. But I think that sharing one’s most difficult and vulnerable experiences with the masses causes them harm. Personal matters and trials were never meant to be shown in real time to strangers. It exploits their own pain, typically to keep audiences watching and invested. This ruins the sanctity and holiness that I think adversity is meant to bring to our lives. There is certainly purpose in communal suffering, but grief is meant to be shared in real communities, not the online abyss. Obviously, influencers aren’t the crux of the problem with social media, but they are complicit in its harms. They also monetize off addictive algorithms and the harm that social media perpetuates.
In an issue about peace, I want to emphasize the importance of personal peace. Social media sows seeds of rage bait and comparison. The fruit of these seeds is internal and external conflict. I am angry when I think about what social media has taken from me over the years. It has robbed me of time, attention span, and connection. It has often replaced peace with unnecessary anger. Since unshackling from social media, I’ve read more, journaled, spent more time with family and friends, and gotten better sleep. Contributing to a more peaceful world starts by cultivating peace within ourselves. This is only truly achieved by unplugging from social media.