Perhaps I have a weak line of argument. It does cause widespread harm, if not to you certainly to others. At root it shouldn't matter. But, it seems it does. It's like dope. Why all the furore when mature reasonable adults can self police their use and avoid trouble? It's everyone else, who overdo it, who become lost in psychosis, who turn to crime. Sure, decriminalise it. But... look how the Dutch are saying it's far more complex than just open slather. I chose dope as a comparison because it's absolutely not addictive in strict sense and is most definitely socially habituated, as twitter is.
Society isn't better because of social media. Maybe you're OK. Society at large isn't.
Would you eg say teenage girls are not at risk? That people with mental health issues are not at risk? Not that it defines it as "ban it now" but "where's the harm" seems disinegenuous. There's harm. How much, what remediates, unclear. For me, it's avoid. You differ.
I might add my immediate family is also split on this. So I don't believe I am in the majority on this.
Would you eg say teenage girls are not at risk? That people with mental health issues are not at risk? Not that it defines it as "ban it now" but "where's the harm" seems disinegenuous. There's harm. How much, what remediates, unclear. For me, it's avoid. You differ.
Every piece of information that is transmitted between humans carries the risk of harming someone.
I genuinely believe that society at large is better due to social media.
I weigh a news article in a tabloid newspaper less than I would an article in the New York Times for example.
Why do we need to make a blanket statement about social media being untrustworthy? Information without context can't be trusted no matter the medium.