Part 1
After reviewing the content by Haidt, I was understanding of the concerns mentioned and appreciated the concepts of humans being ultrasocial and in need of deep connection, however I do not believe that the platforms mentioned are not safe for young people. I feel there is a disconnect between generations and like many advances in technology, some conform differently than others and are benefitted differently. I believe the social interactions that Haidt felt were being taken away from adolescents disregard the current global state. I feel that social media did not remove the youths’ social life, but actually increased social life differently. I feel that face to face, is something that still happens today but at a lower rate. For example I feel that youth are able to communicate with family and friends easier. As someone that grew up in a disadvantaged neighborhood, I was not able to participate in many outdoor activities. Simultaneously, I also did not have access to others through technology or phones. As a result, growing up, I was extremely anti-social and only communicated with immediate family. I also feel that technology has been better for education as it provided answers to youth that were curious. I believe the incorporation of technology with school systems were rushed and the success of technology was dependent upon educators. Being technologically savvy has been a consistent requirement within many professional fields and I feel that many entering professional fields should understand how to use technology appropriately. I believe this would start with youth understanding what is appropriate technology usage and what is not.
Part 2
Currently, I strive to work with the population mentioned as I am passionate about working with youth. When considering the older population, I feel technology is more harmful due to skepticism and fear of the advancements being made. I have witnessed older adults being able to communicate with family members through platforms and connecting with others when they aren’t physically able to. Negatively, I have also witnessed older adults being scammed through advancements of AI on social media platforms. I believe there should be limits on the platforms readily available to the public. After reviewing the article, I recalled the social media platforms mentioned which made me consider the amount of consumer responsibility being taken. I feel the evidence within the article do not hold up with this population as individuals were able to acknowledge platforms that should not be utilized, I feel this awareness is a clear indicator that individuals are not being manipulated by these platforms.
I do feel that more technological advances would impact clinical practice with families as boundary confusion as mentioned in part one is a concern for both clinician and client. I also feel that older individuals may continue to have difficulties navigating more virtual services and understanding what is appropriate when communicating such as through unencouraged platforms. I feel their argument of certain social media platforms being harmful holds up well as the content can be misleading or harmful. Alternatively, I believe that the claim that education and social interactions are declining is more complicated as it is not a black and white issue.
Hi,
I enjoyed reading your post because you shared your own experiences with technology and how it helped you stay connected with others. One point I would challenge is the idea that people are not being manipulated by social media just because they recognize certain platforms can be harmful. I think people can still be influenced by algorithms, targeted content, and constant notifications even when they know the risks. During my placement at Carrie Steele Pitts Home, I have seen technology be helpful for communicating with foster and adoptive families and sharing information about workshops, but I have also seen how important face-to-face conversations are for building trust. Your post also reminded me of Haidt’s point about the decline of free play and independence among children. He argues that children need real-life experiences, not just online interactions, because they help develop confidence, problem-solving skills, and healthy relationships.
Tia,
I am a bit confused by your post. First, I am wondering if you read the Haidt article about the 7 lines of evidence; which ones are you taking issue with? What do you think they got wrong? If you listened to his TED Talk, he describes very good data that suggests 1 to 1 device utilization in schools did NOT help students learn better. Rather, it resulted in lower test scores.
I get your argument that youth did not lose their social life to technology, but rather that it just changed. However, Haidt and Rausch suggest that social life requires in-person contact to exist. They are talking about the impact of so much technology on the physical and developmental growth of young people.
The assignment was to take the principles Haidt discussed and see whether they apply to populations other than youth. You talk a bit about families, but I will admit that I didn’t understand this sentence….”.I feel the evidence within the article do not hold up with this population as individuals were able to acknowledge platforms that should not be utilized, I feel this awareness is a clear indicator that individuals are not being manipulated by these platforms. ”
I get that you don’t share this opinion regarding the impact of social media. But if you really want to make your point, it will take much more than just your opinion. There is a wealth of literature on this impact, and if you read Haidt’s article, you know that. Saying that we still have free will, so it’s wrong, is also unrealistic. If you read about and study algorithms, the one thing you should know is that when we are on social media, we are giving up free will. The only choice we have is to watch or not to watch, right? What about controlling WHAT we watch?
I understand that you believe social media has enabled a lot of people to connect and learn in ways that have been good for them – and you. But this is significant data, and you don’t just get to say “It’s wrong.” As a professional social worker, you at least need to talk about the points he makes and attempt to refute them with knowledge, data, or experience.
And, by the way, there was an additional question on the Reamer material that you never answered. I recommend that you read the blog post instructions more closely, and try not to let your passionate perspective keep you from addressing the questions.
Dr P