Mediaboss Marketing

"It just makes you want to stop and throw your phone in the bin it's so eye-opening."

The documentary premiered at Sundance Film Festival early this year but hit Netflix this month and is trending online and among parents who have long worried about the impact social media has on kids' self-esteem.

In it, many of the co-creators of global platforms including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest and others reveal they are so concerned about the harms of social media that they ban or severely restrict their kids' use.

Social psychologist and New York University professor Jonathan Haidt notes a gigantic increase in depression, anxiety, self-harm and suicide among pre-teen and teenage children, Gen Z, who have been on social media since mid-primary school.

He says numbers of teenage girls admitted to hospital for self-harm including cutting were stable until around 2011-13, but in the US these have risen 62 per cent for 15-19-year-olds and 189 per cent for pre-teen girls; "that is horrifying".

"We've seen the same pattern with suicide," he said. In older teen girls it's up 70 per cent compared with the first decade of this century and "in pre-teen girls, who had very low rates [previously] it's up 151 per cent and that pattern points to social media."

Watching the documentary, Catherine Manning, who runs self-esteem workshops for young people, said the revelations about the methods used by social media platforms to get into people's minds and the statistics around the resulting self harm left her "in tears".

Catherine Manning, a self-esteem educator, was "in tears" watching the Netflix documentary in which social media's creators outline its harms to young people. Her daughter, Lucinda, has changed her ideas about the platforms after watching it.Credit:Jason South

"I was just thinking about how abducted our kids have been and how much it [social media] is already causing them so much pain and anxiety. But at the same time, it is such a great tool for our socialisation," said Ms Manning, CEO of SEED workshops.

"The statistics presented about the rise in self-harming behaviours and suicide among young people certainly correlate with those around the increase in things like body dysmorphia [a mental health condition in which physical defects are imagined] across the board," she said.

"The powerful thing for kids to identify is that something they care about so much has no care for them other than as revenue ... there is nothing new in this, but it makes it a whole lot more personal."

Teens including Neisha Biviano, her friend Mia Quinn, also 15, and Ms Manning's daughter Lucinda, 18, are saying the documentary's revelations have been so affecting it will influence their real-world relationships with social media.

I was just thinking about how abducted our kids have been and how much it [social media] is already causing them so much pain and anxiety.

Mia Quinn, an aspiring visual artist and photographer, said despite the value platforms such as Instagram offer, especially showing her other young people's art, after watching The Social Dilemma she immediately told her friendship circle she wanted to delete the app.

"I had just watched The Social Dilemma and said [to my friends] guys let's all delete Insta and Snapchat, I said 'Insta isn't working for me I don't want to be here anymore, this isn't right'.

"Then again, I don't want to leave it and move to a different platform without my friends [who did not want to abandon it entirely]."

She unfollowed large numbers of people, including all "influencers", and stuck only with those offering creativity.

She said this "confused the algorithm" on Instagram - which guesses what individual users might like and curates personalised streams and targeted ads - and "it now only shows me new people to follow that are mainly art students, and that's really good".

"I think the best thing you can do is buy books, unfollow influencers who make their money from social media - they bring more harm than good to everyone - turn your notifications off ... and follow more of your hobbies and interests rather than people."

Ms Biviano says despite the instinct to disconnect, the fact many positive things come into her world via social media means it is worth continuing with. "It has two possibilities: there is a really amazing virtual place that's filled with acceptance and it can be a lovely creative outlet and inspiring.

"But the other is this breeding zone full of self-destructive energy and hate and this increasing amount of political, polarising views getting thrown up, and also an increasing amount of negative and really toxic, unreachable standards that have been created."

Julie Inman Gant, eSafety Commissioner, has "lived" The Social Dilemma and believes the will by giant platforms to lead the creation of a safe social medial culture is not there.Credit:Janie Barrett

The national eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, has insider experience of tech corporation culture and says the will to create a safe environment is not there.

I worked in the tech industry for more than 20 years and actually lived the Social Dilemma," she said, "I tried to serve as a constructive safety antagonist from within the industry, but it only got me so far because the corporate will and leadership was not there."

The film particularly illustrates the influence of social media on children who may not yet have developed sufficient critical reasoning skills to stay safe online and combat fake news, she said.

If the tech giants are building the digital roads they must also be installing the virtual seatbelts and stop signs and policing theses roads to keep users safe.

Given Facebook has 2.5 billion users and YouTube has 1.5 billion, and algorithms create and recommend content, "the frightening reality is that they [users] could spend this critical early part of their lives only hearing one viewpoint".

Loading

Melbourne University senior social sciences lecturer Dr Lauren Rosewarne has written two books on social media and says revelations about activities of big tech companies shock users but they generally do not cause widespread user-behavior change.

The impression given in The Social Dilemma that developers were "babes in the woods" who had no idea features they built could become harmful or addictive were "laughable", but members of the generation that has known no life before social media are equipped with more media literacy than older peers.

"What we need to do culturally is think about how do we become more savvy users and how do we control the tech we use rather than letting it control us," she said.

Lucinda Manning, 18, said though parents may believe kids did not question the dark arts of social media platforms competing in what the film dubs the "attention extraction" industry, they do and will be even more selective now.

Friends have deleted apps like Facebook and Instagram as theyre very aware of the negative impacts it has on their mental health.

"I do believe my generation is becoming very aware of the impacts social media has on them. I think many parents think young people dont care and arent paying attention but the reality is we are, and we really do care.

"Many people my age are changing the ways they use their devices, including friends of mine who have deleted apps like Facebook and Instagram as theyre very aware of the negative impacts it has on their mental health.

"The documentary definitely encouraged me to think more about the amount of time and effort I put into social media and I believe just watching the documentary is a step towards change."

Our weekly newsletter will deliver expert analysis of the race to the White House from our US correspondent Matthew Knott. Sign up for The Sydney Morning Herald's newsletter here, The Age's here, Brisbane Times' here and WAtoday's here.

Wendy Tuohy is a Sunday Age senior writer.

Read more from the original source:
'It makes you want to throw your phone in the bin': The film turning teens off social media - The Age

(Image: Matt Mitgang with permission to CHS)

Late Thursday night, the Seattle Police Department rolled into groups of protesters after demonstrators set fire to a roadblock ring of debris and trash blocking the 12th and Pine intersection in front of the departments East Precinct. Live streams, protesters, and residents reported several arrests including at least one journalist.

Pepper bomb explosions echoed across Capitol Hill again like clockwork.

A second more aggressive volley of police crowd control explosives banged through the night beginning just after midnight as witnesses said police were responding to property damage to buildings in the area including busted windows at store and restaurant fronts near 12th and Pine. The property damage was not limited to anti-police protesters. The owner of a nearby brewery reported a police explosives blast heavily damaged the patio of the business as SPD pushed demonstrators north on 12th Ave and then pursued them into Cal Anderson.

SPD deployed such a volume of munitions that shrapnel could be seen littering 12th Ave after the melee as police locked down the perimeter around the precinct and at least one wholly intact bomb was found in the midst of the litter.

BECOME A 'PAY WHAT YOU CAN' CHS SUBSCRIBER TODAY: Support local journalism dedicated to your neighborhood. SUBSCRIBE HERE. Jointo become a subscriber at$1/$5/$10 a monthto help CHS provide community news withNO PAYWALL. You can also sign up fora one-time annual payment.

Thursdays overnight clash followed protests across Capitol Hill, Seattle, and the country Wednesday night demonstrating against injustice in the Breonna Taylor police killing, and another small clash Tuesday night following the Seattle City Councils vote to override Mayor Jenny Durkans vetoes of police budget cuts.

In Wednesdays clash, marked by the disturbing images of a cop rolling his bike over a prone demonstrator and a protester striking an officer in the helmet with a baseball bat, police and demonstrators reported 13 people were taken into custody in Seattles protests, mostly on Capitol Hill.

(Image: Matt Mitgang with permission to CHS)

There was no immediate tally for Thursdays counts.

Seattle Polices Twitter account, unlike the night before when it provided a useful play by play including announcements of dispersal demands and, eventually, the declaration of an unlawful assembly, remained silent through early Friday morning. Announcements, many unintelligible, were reported being delivered by voice and loudspeaker at street level by commanding officers. The precincts new public address system, added when the city constructed a large concrete wall around the facility, did not appear to be utilized.

Video streams showed what appeared to be several people taken into custody. Omari Salisburys Converge Media reported that one of its journalists had been arrested. Video of the arrest showed Bobby Stills identifying himself as media as he was being held down by police and cuffed before being carted away to the waiting prisoner van.

Overnight jail records show one person booked for obstruction, two for failure to disperse, and at least four people for both. Another was booked for investigation of possession of an incendiary device. Meanwhile, it was not clear from records if Stills was jailed or released without being booked.

After gathering in Cal Anderson starting around 9 PM, a group of a few hundred demonstrators began a march through the neighborhoods with police trailing the procession. As groups did the night previous, the demonstration arrived near the East Precinct. This time, some in the crowds began gathering debris and objects to build a ringed roadblock around the intersection of 12th and Pine. When the first flames appeared, the ranks of observing SPD bike officers began to build on 12th Ave before the first flash bang was thrown and the crowds of police moved in. Seattle Fire later responded down the block from the nearby Fire Station 25.

Later after the second clash after midnight cleared out most of the remaining demonstrators, a contingent of bike police continued to hold down the area in front of the East Precinct. Unlike the previous nights this week when police sirens wailed through the neighborhood, residents reported a new sound from the officers keeping watch on a dozen or so remaining protesters as bike bells chimed through the night.

(Image: Matt Mitgang with permission to CHS)

BECOME A 'PAY WHAT YOU CAN' CHS SUBSCRIBER TODAY: Support local journalism dedicated to your neighborhood. SUBSCRIBE HERE. Jointo become a subscriber at$1/$5/$10 a monthto help CHS provide community news withNO PAYWALL. You can also sign up fora one-time annual payment.

Originally posted here:
Another night of anti-police protest on Capitol Hill ends in 'crowd control' pepper bomb explosions, arrests - CHS Capitol Hill Seattle News

Sep 25, 2020

The CCI3*-S and CCI4*-S divisions were able to complete their show jumping before the torrential rain interrupted the competition for the CCI2*-S division.

The show jumping course was designed by Chris Barnard. When asked how he felt about his courses, he remarked that the CCI4*-S "walked as tough as it rode." With only 14 clear rounds in the CCI4*-S, there were many changes to the leaderboard after dressage. Barnard designed his courses to be "fair for the level - the good ones have questions to answer, and the greener ones at each level are still quite comfortable to jump around. It's such a beautiful ring, and it's easy to design a nice, flowy course. It's good footing and the horses jump well off of it."

The outdoor arena drained nicely for CCI2*-S competition to resume. The cross-country footing is in excellent shape after the rain for the final phase of the FEI competition tomorrow.

The leaderboards going into the final phase tomorrow are as follows:

CCI4*-S

1st: Elisabeth Halliday-Sharp & Fernhill By Night (24.50)2nd: Matthew Flynn & Wizzerd (25.90)3rd: Doug Payne & Quantum Leap (26.80)4th: Will Faudree & Caeleste (27.40)T-5th: Doug Payne & Vandiver (28.30)T-5th: Clayton Frederick & FE Always In Time (28.30)

CCI3*-S

1st: Alexander O'Neal & Miss MoneyPenny V (29.00)2nd: Boyd Martin & Fernhill Prezley (29.40)3rd: Boyd Martin & Penhill Celtic (29.60)4th: Hallie Coon & Cooley SOS (30.40)T-5th: Sydney Elliott & Commando D'Osthuy (31.00)T-5th: Kurt Martin & D.A. Lifetime (31.00)

CCI2*-S

1st: Elisabeth Halliday-Sharp & Maryville Sir Henry (27.40)2nd: Kelly Prather & Catch Me Cooley (28.90)3rd: Leslie Law & Tout De Suite (30.50)4th: Kimberly Steinbuch & Classiro (32.30)5th: Dana Cooke & FE Whole Lotta Rosie (32.40)

For full scores, click here. To view the event program, click here.

Here is the original post:
Liz Halliday-Sharp and Fernhill By Night Take Control of the Stable - United States Eventing Association

Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention postedthen removedupdated guidelines about airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. These guidelines indicated that there was good evidence that the virus can travel further than six feet through the air (the current presumed safe physical distance), especially in indoor settings without good ventilation.

According to the CDC, the updated guidelines were a draft that was accidentally posted too early. But the move left the public and politicians alike wondering if this was another case of political interference with a vital public health institution.

When we breathe, talk, sing, or cough, we produce respiratory particles of a variety of sizes. If a particle is five micrometers or larger, its considered a droplet. If its smaller than that, its an aerosol. The larger, heavier droplets that we spew will fall to the ground firstusually within about six feet or less. Smaller particles can travel farther or hang in the air like smoke.

Samuel Scarpino is an assistant professor in the College of Science and head of the Emergent Epidemics Lab.Photo by Adam Glanzman/Northeastern University

When the CDC and the WHO say airborne, they almost always mean aerosolized transmission, says Samuel Scarpino, an assistant professor at Northeastern and head of the Emergent Epidemics Lab. However, the colloquial use of airborne would probably also include small or large droplet transmission.

We know this coronavirus can be spread through contact with larger droplets. The question is, can these smaller particles, known as aerosols, also transmit the virus?

We have an increasingly large body of anecdotal evidence that is all pointing in the same direction, which is that the virus can be transmitted via aerosol, Scarpino says.

In July, 239 scientists from 32 countries wrote an open letter to the World Health Organization, urging officials to recognize that the coronavirus is airborne. The WHO has since updated its guidelines to include airborne transmission, although it still places the majority of the emphasis on droplets.

Superspreader events, such as the one that occurred at a choir rehearsal in Skagit, Washington in March, are part of the evidence indicating the virus can spread through aerosols. Despite some basic safety measures, such as avoiding physical contact and keeping some distance, a single symptomatic person likely spread the virus to 52 people during the two and a half hour rehearsal.

There is also evidence from laboratory studies showing that the virus can be carried in the aerosolized particles, and that airborne transmission can spread the virus between both ferrets and hamsters.

But we dont have the smoking gun of a study demonstrating a person being infected by aerosol transmission in a laboratory-controlled setting. And we arent going to get it.

Unless you do human trials, which are completely unethical in this case, its very hard to convincingly demonstrate that aerosol transmission is happening, as opposed to the many other possible routes that someone could have gotten infected, Scarpino says. Were in a situation where the laboratory evidence is suggestive, but not as strong as it is for other diseases that we know are dominated by aerosol transmission.

You should still be wearing a mask.

We know that mask wearing is highly effective, Scarpino says. If it was just aerosol transmission, cloth masks would be pretty nearly worthless and thats not the case. So certainly, small and large droplets still matter.

Just because aerosol transmission is possible, doesnt mean it happens all the time. It could be rare, Scarpino says. This virus tends to spread through superspreader events, meaning that a large percentage of infections come from a small number of people. A study of the virus spread in Hong Kong estimated that 80 percent of infections were being caused by just 20 percent of people with the virus.

You could imagine a situation where a small number of the largest superspreading events are due to aerosol transmission, Scarpino says. So even if its uncommon, when it happens, and you have one of those individuals in an enclosed space, you end up with a huge number of secondary infections.

So it would be sensible to modify recommendations to limit the size of indoor gatherings, especially in places with poor ventilation. But definitely dont stop washing your hands, keeping your distance, and wearing the all-important mask.

By their very nature, these representative bodies like the CDC need to be a little bit slower around digesting the scientific evidence and making sure theres consensus in the scientific community before they really put out a big announcement, Scarpino says.

Especially at a time when everyone is paying attention, the CDC and similar organizations need to get the messaging right.

But there are political ramifications associated with acknowledging aerosol transmission, Scarpino says, especially as we approach the election. The large political rallies that Donald Trump has favored in the past, especially those being held indoors, for long periods of time, would be off the table.

Since we know that the Trump administration has manipulated the CDCs messaging in the past, I think we have every reason to be very cautious around what motivated this change that we saw, Scarpino says.

For media inquiries, please contact Marirose Sartoretto at m.sartoretto@northeastern.edu or 617-373-5718.

Read more:
What do we know about airborne transmission of the coronavirus? - News@Northeastern

"That was there in the [19]30's. That's not invented by social media you just see those reflexes mirrored in social media, theyre not created by social media," the executive added. "It's why tabloids do better than the [Financial Times], and it's also a human thing. People respond to engaging emotion much more than they do to, you know, dry coverage. ...This wasn't invented 15 years ago when Mark Zuckerberg started Facebook."

In the final stretch of the 2020 campaign, the Facebook posts with the most engagement in the United States most days measured by likes, comments, shares, and reactions are from conservative voices outside the mainstream media: Dan Bongino, Ben Shapiro, David Harris, Jr., Franklin Graham, and Blue Lives Matter, according to the Facebook-owned tool Crowdtangle. Trumps personal page also regularly makes the top of the list, in effect allowing him to become a publisher in his own right and navigate around the traditional media.

Left-wing posts make the daily top-25 much less frequently. Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and the Facebook savvy Occupy Democrats are among the pages that occasionally hit such levels of engagement.

The growth of right-wing content on the platform has enraged liberals, who accuse the social media giant of kowtowing to the right out of fear of being painted as biased toward the left. It has also ratcheted up the brawl between the left and the right over the social network weeks before the election, as both parties try to influence the platforms policies.

After Trump effectively leveraged Facebook in 2016 to help make up for a significant cash disadvantage, it has become a pivotal theater in the electoral war. Trump and Biden have spent over $173 million for ads on the platform so far and are expected to spend tens of millions more, according to the companys political ad tracker (Trump over $109 million and Biden over $64 million).

But ads are only one battleground. Both parties are fighting for high engagement in organic content, which is much more widely seen. Essentially, it's the difference between "earned media" or coverage of the candidates by news outlets and paid TV ads.

This focus on organic posts is why the success of Bongino and Shapiro have caused so much frustration on the left, along with accusations that Facebook has a pro-conservative bias.

The liberal group Media Matters, which is mostly known for tracking conservative TV and radio, now monitors 5,250 Facebook pages and groups that theyve determined are either influential or of concern, according to spokesperson Laura Keiter. "Theres something [at Facebook] that reflexively or intentionally is mollifying the right-wing," said Angelo Carusone, the president of Media Matters.

Adam Conner, who worked for Facebook in Washington from 2007 to 2014 and is now vice president of Tech Policy at the liberal Center for American Progress Action, told POLITICO that its absurd for Facebook to say this is just something thats playing out in a neutral way. This feels like an abdication of responsibility." He added that Facebook is not a mirror the newsfeed algorithm is an accelerant.

The Biden campaign also blasted Facebook for arguing that the right-wings success on the platform simply reflects society.

"Facebook's platform is a mirror alright a fun house mirror, campaign spokesperson Bill Russo said. One that has twisted and distorted our world and our politics into something barely recognizable, where conspiracy theories and disinformation run rampant. This is not a feature of our society that we must simply accept. It is a choice to create an algorithm that feeds the distrust and polarization that are tearing us apart."

Republicans have been just as critical of Facebook in the run-up to the election. This week, Trump spoke alongside nine state attorneys general and said the government is reviewing concrete legal steps against social media sites for limiting the reach of conservatives at the urging of the radical left.

Facebook says that the most engaged content isn't necessarily the most viewed political fare, the company maintains, is actually a small percentage of what people see on the platform. Users newsfeeds are filled with more nonpartisan, pop culture content than the engagement list suggests, according to the companys head of newsfeed, John Hegeman.

Facebook does not provide data on which articles and posts achieve the most reach but says it is trying to find a way to make that information publicly available.

The Facebook executive argued that frustration on the left on how to counter right-wing populism is another instance of social media reflecting an existing dynamic, rather than creating it.

If you're a far-left partisan then why can't you fight fire with fire? the executive said. That debate among progressives [and] I count myself as a center-left progressive is as old as the hills. All center-left campaigners and politicians always ask themselves, Why can't [we] seem to rile their supporters as much as right-wing populists have?

Some conservatives also argue that they invested in the platform early on as a workaround to the left-leaning mainstream press.

Whats really going on here is obvious to anyone paying attention: The mainstream media wants to censor content from other sources in an attempt to reestablish the control of the news narrative they lost when the internet broke up their monopoly, John Bickley, editor in chief of the conservative site The Daily Wire, wrote Thursday. The Daily Wire was the top news publisher on all of Facebook in July and August this year when measured by engagement, according to NewsWhip.

In an email to POLITICO, Bickley added: It also makes sense to me that social media users would engage more with content that has a clearer perspective or stronger take on stories and particularly those that push back on predominant narratives with glaring flaws. Ben Shapiro, the founding editor in chief of The Daily Wire, has logged over 175 million engagements on his Facebook page since June 21 compare to just 27 million for The New York Times Facebook page, per CrowdTangle.

POLITICO NEWSLETTERS

Technology news from Washington and Silicon Valley weekday mornings, in your inbox.

After years of Washington regarding Facebook as an amusing curiosity, its founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has struggled to counter the barrage of criticism over Facebooks role in the 2016 election and American politics more broadly.

Members of both parties are increasingly threatening to dismantle the so-called Section 230 protections that shield Facebook and other internet companies from liability.

Ive never been a fan of Facebook, as you probably know. Ive never been a big Zuckerberg fan. I think hes a real problem, Biden told The New York Times editorial board last year. Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked. The Trump administration this week introduced a bill to chip away at those protections.

Liberals are also still smarting over the role Facebook played in Hillary Clintons surprise defeat. But Republicans counter that Democrats had no problem with the company in 2012 when Facebooks engineers allowed the Obama campaign to get around some internal safeguards protecting user privacy. Facebook would "sigh and say, You can do this as long as you stop doing it on Nov. 7, Will St. Clair, who helped write the Obama campaigns Facebook program, told The New York Times in 2013.

The company, with its largely liberal workforce, has been defensive about the censorship allegations from Republicans and also lax in enforcing its rules with some popular conservative pages. In one case, the company erased strikes and downgraded violations for posting misinformation by Trump surrogates Diamond & Silk, according to NBC News. Democrats, meanwhile, argue that its ridiculous for conservatives to claim that Facebook is suppressing content when many of their pages are so popular.

Facebook employees have challenged Zuckerberg in company-wide Q&As on these topics and the CEO has pushed back against his progressive workforce.

The community we serve tends to be, on average, ideologically a little bit more conservative than our employee base, Zuckerberg said during one such forum on June 18, according to a report this week from The Verge. Maybe a little is an understatement...If we want to actually do a good job of serving people, [we have to take] into account that there are different views on different things, and that if someone disagrees with a view, that doesnt necessarily mean that theyre hateful or have bad intent.

Read the original:
Why the right-wing has a massive advantage on Facebook - POLITICO