Archive for the ‘Social Networking’ Category

It’s Time to Nationalize Social Media and Big Tech – City Watch

After a brief chat on the phone, I was informed that I was unwittingly caught up in aRussian-backed media operation, for a publication that had recently offered a writing opportunity.

The outlet PeaceData reached out to me through one of their associate editors (@Alex_Lacusta) via DM on July 8, writing, were a young, progressive global news outlet that is seeking young and aspiring writers. I was told that the editors liked my writing and views, and was initially offered $200 to $250 per piece. (Photo above: Jason Howie CC BY 2.0)

I went back and forth with Alex, while in the meantime I checked out the editors social media pages on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, the pieces that were published (which generally aligned with my values), and contributors which included some Twitter blue checks and leftist journalists, adding to the operations legitimacy. After exercising due diligence and expressing interest in the opportunity, Alex dropped the rate to $100 to $150 per piece, with the hook that I could write a regular column. Alex informed me I could choose the topics so long as they focused on anti-war, anti-corruption, and environmentalism. I accepted and was excited to have a home and compensation for my work.

After talking to the reporter who DMed me, I was sent areportdetailing how the Russian oligarch-sponsored troll farm Internet Research Agency was behind the PeaceData front. I was initially shocked and confused, but in retrospect, the red flags added up.

On July 22, I noticed the first red flag. Alex and Albert Popescu, another associate editor for PeaceData had eerily similar profile pictures which turned out to be digitally generated fake images. Popescus account was also recently created in May 2020. The second odd occurrence happened in email exchanges with Alex. Prepositions were sometimes omitted and verbiage would be singular rather than plural, or vice versa. Yet, I had been in contact with busy editors for legitimate publications that would make grammatical mistakes here and there. I was also paid by three separate Paypal accounts, which seemed suspicious.

The last red flag was the most egregious and led me to distance myself. I had been notified that my first article arguing that U.S. sanctions and the embargo against Venezuela were not about enforcinghuman rights was republished inGlobal Research Centre, a conspiracy blog that I was unfamiliar with at the time. I looked briefly on their home page and saw articles that were critical of U.S. foreign policy, the U.S. government response to the dismal state of current affairs, and capitalist hegemony. About a week later, I was scrolling through mind-numbingQAnonposts on Twitter and noticed that the Q accounts were sharing hydroxychloroquine propaganda that was linked from Global Research.

I was disturbed and didnt want my thorough, well-sourced work to be associated with a conspiracy blog. I started digging. Along with hydroxychloroquine conspiracies, I found 9/11 truther articles and pro-Putin content. I started diving through the PeaceData archive and found some vaguely pro-Putin content, notably one article defending Belarussian authoritarian Alexander Lukashenkos state violence on demonstrators. I then decided that I didnt want to be associated with PeaceData any longer. Unfortunately, I had already submitted my final piece by this point.

In the days and weeks following September 1, I was (and still am) constantly inundated with requests for comment from outlets. I initially talked to reporters off the record, as I thought this experience would ruin aspirations of becoming more frequently published. As a journalist committed to transparency and as a Socialist, I lost sleep over my involvement with a reactionary regime that I have been previously critical of. After mulling it over for a night, I opted for transparency and went on therecord. I turned over my emails and PayPal receipts to reporters and provided statements to those who reached out. I was never contacted by law enforcement.

In the time between my final piece being submitted and then later published, Twitter and thenFacebooksuspended all PeaceData linked accounts, following a tip from the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations. I was caught up in the fallout. Twitter blanket suspended every single account I ever had access to, relaying that I was manipulating the platform for accessing multiple accounts.

My account, my former employers accounts, and a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) linked account were all suspended due to their association with my digital footprint. I had not used my former employers account since April 2019 and I hadnt posted anything on the DSA associated account since about March 2019. None of these accounts, except my account, had any relation with PeaceData.

After I noticed that every account I ever had access to was suspended, I reached out to two reporters who had been following the story and I had been speaking with. I trusted them, as they were among most of (but not all) the journalists who didnt misquote me or editorialize in their write-ups.

I flagged the account suspensions and they requested comment from Twitter. At first, a spokesperson failed to respond to either. It wasnt until one of the reporters tweeted about it, highlighting that Twitter had suspended a journalists account along with other associated accounts, calling it ridiculous. Following the reporters post to get the accounts reinstated, all were reactivated about three hours after the tweet. Twitters spokespeople then responded to one of the requests for comment, stating, we suspended these accounts out of an abundance of caution.

I was told candidly that had the reporter not posted about it, my account and those associated would likely have been suspended longer or permanently banned. Fortunately, my former employer didnt notice or at least didnt reach out. On the other hand, DSA comrades were quick to notice and didnt seem pleased with my involvement in getting one of their accounts suspended. I was deeply apologetic, offered an honest account on the situation, and elected to remove myself immediately when the account was reinstated.

Sadly, I wasnt the only one affected in the PeaceData mess. Others were also thrown under the bus by a social media corporation not exercising due diligence and overreacting. Over 200 independent journalists were implicated, including Jacinda Chan, a person with a complex disability, whose account was temporarily purged from Facebook.

Chan told theDaily Beastthat after her suspension she was unable to find a caregiver in assisting her daily living, as she used Facebook to find home health aides. When pressed for comment, Facebook cited her posts as advertisements, telling theDaily Beast, its against company policy for users to either attempt to or successfully sell, buy or exchange site privileges or Facebook product features, including attempting to complete the U.S. authorizations process on behalf of another individual. Public relations spin aside, a spokesperson for the networking site later stated that the moderators planned to reinstate Chans account.

While understandable that Twitter and Facebook were attempting to mitigate the influence of a Russian oligarch-sponsored media campaign that targeted leftist journalists and independent media, likeCounterPunch, the blanket suspension demonstrates how tech giants keep their procedures under tight wraps. Ultimately, big tech and social media platforms arent transparent and are only accountable to negative press and revenue streams, rather than serving the public interest. The motivating rationale driving their irresponsibility and unaccountable actions: profit and consolidating market share.

Social Media And Tech Giants Arent Accountable To The Public

The tech oligopolies and monopolies and particularly social media corporations are not accountable to the public and lack meaningful regulation. The industry creates corrosive environments for democratic societies. The result allows for users and workers to be manipulated and exploited so that the industry can secure market share and profits.

The proliferation of conspiracy across the ideological spectrum has seeped into the mainstream through social media. The most flagrant pushing of conspiratorial dogmatism is through QAnon, which evolved from a fringe online conspiracy to being embraced byTrump,far-right popular media, and now propelled into themainstream, giving it cult-like status.

As of October 2, 2020, 75 Republicans, two Democrats, one Libertarian, and three independent candidates are espousing sympathies for Q in the election season. There are nowmillionsof users and thousands of groups across social networking sites that are dedicated true-believers to Q. Thedelayedmeasures from social media platforms have resulted in the conspiracy metastasizing, causing Q to spread and adherents committing acts of fascistterrorismin the name of stopping the cabal and those that oppose Trumpian autocracy.

Outlandish online conspiracy isnt limited to the fringes or far-right: liberals have also fallen prey to false realities. In the U.K.s Prime Minister runoff, Socialist Labourite Jeremy Corbyn was the center of a conspiracy thatsmearedthe former anti-apartheid activist as an anti-semite and terrorist sympathizer. While theBritishandAmericanpress abetted this narrative, social media users on the right and center endlessly shared this fake news to discredit Corbyn.

During the 2020 Democratic Primary,prominent liberalspromoted conspiracy that U.S. SenatorBernie Sanderswas awittingRussian asset, while also likening his supporters toNazi brownshirts. Given his background and prior statements denouncing Putins far-right regime, like the smears Corbyn faced, these claims were completely beyond the pale.

Even the left dabbles in conspiracy on social media, with some elements outright dismissing the Trump-Russia connection or the reactionary tendencies of Putins regime as U.S. intelligence propaganda. Yet given the long history of the intelligence and foreign policy apparatus outright lying (remember theGulf of Tonkincharade or the WMDs in Iraq or James Clappers testimony before Congress?), the skepticism is more understandable. Furthermore, the corporate media obsession and Democratic Party reductionism of blaming the entirety of the U.S.s failures on a Russian Manchurian candidate and Putin hacking the election also dissuades the left in realizing that far-right governments like Russia, Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia have an interest in influencing U.S. politics.

Social media platforms, along with corporate media, have allowed nefarious actors to push narratives to audiences while either under- or overreacting in their responses depending on the ideological underpinnings from foreign-linked information. For example, reactionary propaganda from Israel and Saudi Arabia client states of the U.S. mostly go unchallenged andcritical viewsare met with censorship. Conversely, some credible reports citing the U.S. governments incompetence or imperialist brutality from outlets likeTeleSur(essentially Venezuelan state media) are more frequentlycensored. With that said, censorship of Russian information is more nuanced, and appears that its ideological framework resembles the Cold War tactics of yesteryear, rather than overt ideological or economic biases.

Twitter and Facebook have only recently started labeling content as manipulated media or removing posts, mostly opting for the former. While the platforms have started issuing this tag, posts arestill visibleto users. Facebook has recently moved toremoveusers and groups promoting QAnon. While likely for the best, this should be approached with careful skepticism and challenged as the removal of content and accounts could ultimately be used (it already has been) against the left and independent media. Its a bit of a catch-22. Free speech and press freedoms should be vigilantly protected, yet its no question that allowing conspiracy dissemination on social media is pushing segments of the public into mythological existences. The environment is a threat to democratic societies.

While allowing users to be constantly bombarded with conspiratorial misinformation, manipulated media, or fake news, social networking corporations have gobbled up the competition, creating a consolidated market for consumers.Facebookhas swallowed up WhatsApp, Instagram, Oculus, and have been exploring the prospect of acquiring other tech-based services, whileTwitterhas acquired Periscope, Tweetdeck, and other platforms. Consolidation isnt exclusive to Facebook and Twitter. Other tech corporations are acquiring competitors and skirtingantitrust lawswhile remaining mostly unregulated and unaccountable to the public.

Uber hasignored pressurefor improved screening processes for gig workers and ensuring that riders (especiallywomen) are kept safe. The ride-sharing tech duopoly (along with Lyft) has been accused ofripping offworking-class drivers andthreatened capital strikes.

Google run by tech conglomerate Alphabet failed to safeguardusers data from the NSAs domestic spying program and has beenaccusedof selling off data, which the corporation hasdenied.

Tesla and SpaceX founder, Elon Musk, has violated labor laws after issuing statementsintimidatingworkers that wished to unionize, while the Securities and Exchange Commission hascitedthe South African billionaire for blatant fraud.

Apple has been caughtdodgingtaxes and working with the exploitative Taiwanese manufacturer,Foxconn, which installed nets to prevent suicides after 14 workers took their own lives due to the conditions. Apples manufacturer has also made workers sign agreements that they wont take their own lives due to the abysmal environment.

Techs top firm, Amazon, has been widely documented violating federal labor laws and engaging in exploitative practices: firing andsmearingpro-union workers, denying safe andappropriate accommodations, and forcing workers to dedicate uncompensated time to beingfriskedat the end of shifts. Jeff Bezoss monopoly has also recentlydonatedto a QAnon-supporting GOP candidate for the Tennessee House of Representatives.

As the tech industry now becomes evermore consolidated and shady business practices mostly go unpunished, profits and executive salaries are reaching an all-time high. According toFortune Uber, Facebook, Dell, Comcast, Microsoft, Tesla, Alphabet (Google), AT&T, Samsung, Verizon, Apple, and Amazon are among the 300 most profitable corporations in the world.

The tech executives, including social media moguls Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg, have made out like bandits. According toForbes, Dorseys net worth is now up to$8.4 billion, while Zuckerberg has become the third richest person in the world, amassing a net worth of$92 billion. Similarly, whileAmazonescapes tax obligations, Jeff Bezos now the worlds wealthiest individual has acquired his very own media outfit,The Washington Post, while his net worth skyrockets to an absurd$181.7 billion.

The industry and their robber baron executives are unaccountable and uninterested in protecting a democratic society the result amounts to users and the public paying the price for big techs consolidation, profits, and salaries.

Democratic Ownership Creates Accountability

Tech behemoths have transformed into public (although privately held) services that virtually every American interacts with regularly.Over a thirdof Westerners look to social media for their news consumption, now with more young people turning to online platforms to get their media fix.69 percentof Americans are Facebook users, while73 percentconsistently consume content on Youtube (owned by Google). Close totwo-thirdsof the U.S. use Amazon, while more than 40 percent use the site monthly.36 percentof Americans use ride-sharing platforms like Uber and Lyft, while every American with a computer or cellphone (a necessity in this era) mostly relies on a binary choice. In a world where the masses are increasingly reliant on tech platforms, its time they serve public transparency and are held accountable under democratic ownership.

Under democratic ownership, speech can be better protected from corporate censorship, and responsiveness to manipulated media or fake news can be better addressed through independent procedural transparency. Its noteworthy that as media and information channels progress, some Western governments have created editorially independent outlets, likeBBCandCBC. Although these institutions are far from perfect and certainly possess a bias towards the status quo, their creation didnt deliver an authoritarian blow to free speech. The same can be applied to social media corporations.

In an oligopolistic or arguably monopolistic environment, big tech and social media monoliths have become too large to manage and hold accountable. Tech giants have increasing political, economic, and social power over the public, while the working-class people become growingly reliant on the platforms. It should be recognized that big techs jumping-off point was created and is now sustained throughpublic funding. Public investments should serve the public, not shareholders, executives, and market consolidation.

Nationalization would also curtail overly exploitative labor practices from big tech and their contractors. While under democratic ownership, labor standards could be more strictly enforced and dignified, high-paying jobs can be promoted. Simultaneously, users and consumers wouldnt be manipulated for profit, personal data could be better secured and protected, and the public could have an independent arbiter to rely on for information. Public ownership serves to protect democratic societies, workers, and users.

At its heart, the profit motive doesnt serve the publics interest and its time that tech giants are nationalized and placed under democratic control. While conspiracies run wild, tech consolidates, users are manipulated, and data is unsecured and auctioned off, democratic societies are at a precipice. Big tech and social media corporations must be placed under democratic ownership for the sake of accountability and transparency to the public.

(Jack Delaneyis a former policy analyst. He worked on issues relating to health care, disability, and labor policy, and is a member of the National Writers Union. Posted first at Counterpunch.org.)

-cw

Read more here:
It's Time to Nationalize Social Media and Big Tech - City Watch

Global Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market 2020-2025: Due to COVID-19 – Increased IP Traffic will Lead to Higher Utilization of CDNs -…

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The "Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - Forecast (2020 - 2025)" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

Content delivery network market value was $11.85 billion in 2019 and is anticipated to see an upsurge during the forecast period and will reach $24.70 billion till 2025 growing at a CAGR of 13.4% in between 2020 to 2025.

Exponentially increasing internet penetration in all the industry verticals along with the increasing utilization of this type of delivery network for traffic handling and latency reduction owing to their effective data handling has been stimulating the market growth across the globe

Key Takeaways

Solution - Segment Analysis

The Content delivery network market is segmented into media delivery, web performance optimization, DRM and transcoding, monitoring and analytics, transparent caching, data security and cloud storage by solution. Media delivery segment held the major share accounting to around 34% in 2019. Content delivery network market value with respect to media delivery solutions was $4.06 billion in 2019 and is anticipated to see an upsurge during the forecast period.

The market will reach $8.6 billion till 2025 growing at a CAGR of 13.66% in between 2020 to 2025. There is a rapid increase in internet users across the globe, which in turn had affected the speed and performance of the websites. Owing to this problem there is a need of media delivery solution.

End User Industry - Segment Analysis

Media & Entertainment is the dominant end user industry of content delivery network market accounting for 30% share of the market in 2019. With media delivery and web performance optimization solutions, users can flawlessly view and access the high definition video content. Various web elements such as video, software updates, games, social media and other content can be delivered more efficiently without building out costly infrastructure.

Social networking sites such as Facebook, twitter and others are also one of the reason increasing internet traffic. Approximately, 1500 million are registered users in social networking sites currently. Growing demand from audiences for accessing online audio and videos coupled with flawless viewing experiences on any devices such as smartphones, laptops, tablets and others to accelerate the content delivery network market

Geography - Segment Analysis

Americas is estimated to hold the prominent share of 38% of global CDN market in 2019 and is forecast to reach $9.18 billion by 2025 growing at CAGR of 13.2% during 2020-2025. The market is analyzed to be driven by enterprises opting for CDN solutions. Media and entertainment industry accounted for the major value for the Americas CDN market in 2019 with online gaming poised to witness the highest growth of CAGR 18.95% during 2020-2025. The largest growing CDN market is APAC which is forecast to grow at CAGR 18.46% from 2020 to 2025 projecting to $7.49 billion by 2025.

The market is poised to be driven by growing SMEs which opt for cloud CDNs and P2P CDNs owing to its cost effectiveness and flexibility. The growth is also estimated to be assisted by increasing access of internet through smartphones and portable computing devices for gaming and media consumption. Penetration of large scale e-commerce websites along with the consumers' preferences for online shopping is also pushing for the employment of CDNs by the mobile companies which has boosted the market growth in this region.

Work from home policy due to Covid-19

Due to Covid-19 situation, there is an increase in work from home options, which can directly and indirectly lead to higher media consumption. Remote classes and training plans also will contribute to increased IP traffic, which will lead to higher utilization of CDNs across countries.

Key Topics Covered:

1. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - Overview

2. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - Executive summary

2.1. Market Revenue, Market Size and Key Trends by Company

2.2. Key Trends by type of Application

2.3. Key Trends segmented by Geography

3. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market

3.1. Comparative analysis

3.1.1. Product Benchmarking - Top 10 companies

3.1.2. Top 5 Financials Analysis

3.1.3. Market Value split by Top 10 companies

3.1.4. Patent Analysis - Top 10 companies

3.1.5. Pricing Analysis

4. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market Forces

4.1. Drivers

4.2. Constraints

4.3. Challenges

4.4. Porters five force model

5. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market -Strategic analysis

5.1. Value chain analysis

5.2. Opportunities analysis

5.3. Product life cycle

5.4. Suppliers and distributors Market Share

6. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - By Type (Market Size -$Million / $Billion)

6.1. Market Size and Market Share Analysis

6.2. Application Revenue and Trend Research

6.3. Product Segment Analysis

6.3.1. Dynamic Content

6.3.2. Static Content

6.3.3. Streaming Content

7. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - By Solution (Market Size -$Million / $Billion)

7.1. Media Delivery

7.2. Web Performance Optimization

7.3. DRM & Transcoding

7.4. Monitoring & Analytics

7.5. Transparent Caching

7.6. Data Security & Cloud Storage

8. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - By Organization Size (Market Size -$Million / $Billion)

8.1. Large Enterprises

8.2. Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs)

9. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - By Service Provider (Market Size -$Million / $Billion)

9.1. Peer-to-Peer CDN

9.2. Cloud CDN

9.3. Traditional CDN

9.4. Telco CDN

9.5. Distributed database

9.6. Others

10. Content Delivery Network (CDN) - By End User Industry(Market Size -$Million / $Billion)

10.1. Segment type Size and Market Share Analysis

10.2. Application Revenue and Trends by type of Application

10.3. Application Segment Analysis by Type

10.3.1. Online Gaming

10.3.2. Media and Entertainment

10.3.3. Educational Institutions

10.3.4. Advertising

10.3.5. Public sector

10.3.6. E-Commerce

10.3.7. Healthcare

10.3.8. Internet service providers(ISPs)

10.3.9. Consumer electronics

11. Content Delivery Network (CDN) - By Geography (Market Size -$Million / $Billion)

12. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market - Entropy

12.1. New product launches

12.2. M&A's, collaborations, JVs and partnerships

13. Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market Company Analysis

13.1. Market Share, Company Revenue, Products, M&A, Developments

13.2. iScaler Ltd.

13.3. CloudFlare Inc.

13.4. Chinacache

13.5. Internap Corporation

13.6. MaxCDN

13.7. Fastly Inc.

13.8. Alphabet Inc. (Google Inc.)

13.9. Hibernia Networks

13.10. Highwinds Network Group Inc.

13.11. Incapsula, Inc.

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/drutrf

Read more:
Global Content Delivery Network (CDN) Market 2020-2025: Due to COVID-19 - Increased IP Traffic will Lead to Higher Utilization of CDNs -...

Kris Jenner suggests societal networking has contributed to Keeping Up With the Kardashians end – The News Pocket

16 October 2020

Kris Jenner thinks societal media has contributed toKeeping Up With the Kardashians coming to a finish.

Kris Jenner

The 64-year old celebrity climbed to fame on the truth show that follows the lives of their mixed Kardashian-Jenner household which is coming to a conclusion after 14 decades at 2021 however Kris thinks that the growth of social networking platforms has diminished the need for tv.

She explained:When we started, there wasnt any Instagram or even Snapchat or alternative social networking platforms. The entire world has really changed.

Today there are numerous, the audience does not need to wait for three or four weeks to find an event. We could provide them all the info anyone would want to understand about real time.

Kris is included in the managing of her allies Kim Kardashian, Kourtney Kardashian, Khloe Kardashian, Kendall Jenner along with Kylie Jenner professions in addition to juggling other small business ventures like conducting a manufacturing firm and Kris has shown that she must maintain her different company independent from one another.

She added:I do not do things in precisely the identical moment. I really dont commingle my encounters or the time that I spend on every different company. They certainly have their own traces. Otherwise I could not stay organized

The TV character also implied thatintellect will be the trick to achievement.

Kris advised Beauty Inc magazine:I really dont believe you must get all the expertise in the Earth, but intellect is actually important.

Read the original here:
Kris Jenner suggests societal networking has contributed to Keeping Up With the Kardashians end - The News Pocket

Aaron Sorkin wants to write The Social Network 2 but only if David Fincher directs – GamesRadar+

Aaron Sorkin is ready to start writing a sequel to The Social Network as soon as David Fincher agrees to direct it.

Speaking to MTVs Happy Sad Confused podcast, the Mollys Game director said: Do I want to write that movie? Yeah I do. I will only write it if David directs it. If Billy Wilder came back from the grave and said he wanted to direct it, Id say Id only do it with David.

Sorkin wrote the script for The Social Network which celebrates its 10th anniversary this month and won the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay and the Golden Globe for Best Screenplay.

Based on Ben Mezrichs book The Accidental Billionaires, the Fincher-directed movie stars Jesse Eisenberg as Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. It follows Zuckerbergs founding of the social networking site as a student at Harvard University and the ensuing lawsuits.

The movie also features Andrew Garfield as Zuckerbergs friend and Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin and Justin Timberlake as the sites first president Sean Parker. Armie Hammer played both entrepreneurial twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, who sued Zuckerberg and claimed he stole the idea for the social networking site from them.

Sorkin went on to say that hed already met with former Facebook investor Roger McNamee to discuss a sequel. McNamee is also the author of 2019s Zucked, a book that takes a critical look at Zuckerberg, as well as Facebook CEO Sheryl Sandberg. No one from Facebook was involved with the original movie (although Saverin was a consultant for Mezrichs book).

With Sorkins first Social Network screenplay featuring iconic quotes like Sorry! My Prada's at the cleaners! Along with my hoodie and my 'fuck you' flip-flops, you pretentious douchebag!, weve got high hopes for the sequel whenever Fincher agrees to come on board In the meantime, be sure to check out Sorkins latest movie, The Trial of the Chicago 7, in cinemas now and coming to Netflix on October 16.

Original post:
Aaron Sorkin wants to write The Social Network 2 but only if David Fincher directs - GamesRadar+

‘Poor health’ and screen time on different devices: What is the link? – Medical News Today

A recent study has found associations between the time we spend in front of some devices and certain negative health outcomes.

New research has found links between the amount of time that people spend in front of some screened devices and various negative health outcomes.

The study findings, which appear in the journal BMC Public Health, lay the groundwork for future research to explore these associations in more detail.

Throughout the 20th century, television spread across the globe, becoming an important part of many peoples lives.

Significant amounts of research have explored the associations between watching TV for prolonged periods of time and various health outcomes.

For example, scientists have found links have between significant TV watching and obesity and type 2 diabetes, as well as abnormal glucose metabolism.

Part of the explanation for these links lies in the association between prolonged periods of time spent in front of the TV and less healthful eating habits, such as eating more fast foods or items that typically contain higher levels of salt, sugar, and saturated fat.

Although TV is still a central part of many peoples leisure time, there are now many other types of screens competing for our attention. These include computers, tablets, and smartphones.

If there is an association between prolonged TV viewing and negative health outcomes, the question arises: Does this association also apply to excessive use of other screened devices?

For corresponding study author Chris Wharton, the assistant dean of innovation and strategic initiatives at Arizona State Universitys College of Health Solutions in Phoenix:

A lot of screen time-related literature has primarily focused on television. But with the advancement of all these other types of devices that people use throughout the day, we wanted to see how health behaviors and factors are associated with a variety of screen-based devices.

Wharton and team produced an 18-question survey and sent it to 978 adults in the United States who owned a TV and at least one other device with a screen.

After excluding some respondents for incorrectly filling in the survey, the researchers had 926 responses.

The survey measured:

The team categorized the participants screen time as light, moderate, or heavy use.

The research showed that people who exhibited heavy use of screened devices that is, those who had a median screen time of 17.5 hours per day had the worst health-related characteristics and dietary patterns.

These users tended to eat fewer fruit and vegetables and more sweets and fast foods. They also tended to have the least physical activity, get the least sleep, have the worst sleep quality, and experience the greatest perceived stress (compared with those with light or moderate screen use).

The researchers also found that overuse of different types of devices also had associations with diet and health characteristics.

People with heavy TV and smartphone use said that they had worse dietary patterns and health characteristics than people who spent a lot of time in front of computers, tablets, or devices connected to a TV.

As Wharton notes, Were engaging with media in lots of different ways, and in mobile ways. And across a lot of these devices, heavy users were engaging in a lot of fast food consumption. So the convenience of (screen use) seems to be associated with the convenience of fast food.

The team also found that watching many episodes of a show or many different shows in quick succession was associated with poor dietary patterns and increases in self-perceived stress.

Although the study identified associations between screen time and health outcomes, precisely how or why this happens is less clear.

For example, while watching TV for an excessive amount of time could be a marker of sedentary behavior which, in turn, could worsen a persons health it might also be that those with worse health are more likely to spend more time in front of screens.

For the study authors, the results suggest that there could be a constellation of diverse factors that adversely impact health, perhaps differentially by type of screen.

Therefore, they call for further research to build on their findings and identify what type of relationship there may be between screen time, the use of different screened devices, and health outcomes.

For Wharton, the findings are particularly pertinent given peoples physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

I worry when people say, Now is the time to re-up your Netflix subscription. What else are you going to do? says Wharton. I would flip that on its head and say, Oh my gosh, now is the time to think about all the things to do other than sit in front of screens.

COVID is really bringing this into crystal-clear focus, that our lives are fully mediated by screens. They were before, they especially are now. I think its a good time to think about what a healthy but technologically plugged-in life could look like where screens arent the only way in which we interact and do everything in our life, but instead are just a small side component of everything else that we do, he adds.

We are nowhere near a conclusion like that, but I think we need to get there because screens have come to dominate us, and they drive real problems in our health.

Read the original post:
'Poor health' and screen time on different devices: What is the link? - Medical News Today