Althouse: "A 19-year-old woman... said she spends about 40% of her time on [TikTok] viewing weight-loss related content."

June 22, 2020

"A 19-year-old woman... said she spends about 40% of her time on [TikTok] viewing weight-loss related content."

"'Last night, I was on TikTok and I ended up feeling so negative about myself I paid £85 for a gym set and personalised fitness plan,' she said.... Because [TikTok] allows anyone to create and publish content, people can promote whatever dietary or weight-loss advice they like. And the way the algorithm of the app works means people do not have to actively search for that content - it can appear as suggested content for that user. This means if someone curiously watches a 'pro-ana' [pro-anorexia] video, they are then supplied with more weight-loss tips and 'thinspo' (content to inspire a person to lose weight). James Downs, an eating disorder and mental health campaigner, said: 'I think that the lack of transparency around how content is fed to different people through the app makes TikTok especially threatening, as none of us can be sure what content we will see and whether it will be safe for our mental wellbeing. One of the things that worries me most about TikTok is how the environment it provides is not guaranteed to be a safe one. We would never send young people into physical environments that might pose them with threats to their wellbeing, so why would we accept dangers in our digital environments either?'"

From "TikTok: Fears videos may 'trigger eating disorders'" (BBC).

Notice the fear of freedom of expression. The quoted expert faults TikTok for failing to guarantee that the its place is "safe," and weight-loss tips are deemed unsafe, because a person may become mesmerized by a stream of weight-loss tips served up by the algorithm and may, as a result, become anorexic.

The expert compares allowing a youngster to watch short videos that might affect her mind with sending her into a place that might be physically dangerous. This is an argument against freedom of expression — seeing ideas as dangerous, rather than as something to be understood, contemplated, and accepted or rejected. Dangers to the mind are the same as dangers to the body.

Doesn't the expert credit the mind with the ability to think? Not in the way that supports freedom of speech (including the freedom to consume the speech of others). To this expert, the mind has the unfortunate capacity to obsessively consume notions and to distort and to generate emotions and impulses that are destructive to the body. TikTok is set to feed content in response to those obsessions and weird impulses, to cultivate them and to take them more deeply into irrationality.

47 comments:

Fernandinande said...: "TikTok: Fears videos may 'trigger eating disorders'"

That's why I've avoided TikTok, except in my case it was concern about dancing disorders.; 6/22/20, 8:03 AM
pious agnostic said...: Doesn't the expert credit the mind with the ability to think?

I look at violent gangs in the street tearing down statues; I see squatters beating each other within barricades; I watch on-line mobs attacking people for things they wrote when they were in middle school.

I can understand why an expert may think the ability to think is not equally distributed to all people.; 6/22/20, 8:06 AM
buwaya said...: This is hardly a new idea.
This has been Catholic practice for a very long time. I grew up under such a regime in a profoundly Catholic place.
Bad ideas, questionable media, people offering such are to be shunned, and both the youth and the public need protection from these.

The notion that people are, in the main, well armored from these things is a romantic fantasy. The idea that societies can survive such a cacophony, in the long term, is also false.

The war over information, over culture, is not really between a bad world-view and "freedom", but between "good" (proven, virtuous) and "bad" (the temptations of Satan, and I am not kidding).

I know this is not a current, fashionable POV, or even one to which most Americans have been exposed to in any serious way. But it is so anyway. The human animal has well known weaknesses, and this is one of them.; 6/22/20, 8:17 AM
Tommy Duncan said...: "The expert compares allowing a youngster to watch short videos that might affect her mind with sending her into a place that might be physically dangerous. This is an argument against freedom of expression — seeing ideas as dangerous, rather than as something to be understood, contemplated, and accepted or rejected."

Learning to understand, contemplate, accept or reject ideas is what maturing is all about. Shielding youngsters from ideas stunts their intellectual and emotional growth. Duh.; 6/22/20, 8:18 AM
MD Greene said...: Dan Quayle was right: A mind is a terrible thing to waste.; 6/22/20, 8:21 AM
Fernandinande said...: "I paid £85 for a gym set and personalised fitness plan"

Ruh-roh, a 19 year old woman was influenced by an influencer!

Apparently author James Downs believes he should be the "go to" influencer, and Lived Experience Designer -
"James Downs
🧘🏻‍♂️ yoga & barre teacher
💪🏼 eating disorder & mental health activist
💚 Ambassador @mqmentalhealth
⭐️ Lived Experience Designer @mindcharity"
("Lived Experience Designer" is probably a special combination of "scholar, activist and educator".)

Similarly, the NYT has an article about how social media is bad because some people - those other people, but not us - might publish their thought crimes.; 6/22/20, 8:24 AM
LYNNDH said...: Doesn't the expert credit the mind with the ability to think?

Well Ann, you hit the nail on its head, so to speak. Young people have not been trained and exposed to thinking for ones self. If they did, it would cause too many problems for the elites.; 6/22/20, 8:32 AM
Mr Wibble said...: Doesn't the expert credit the mind with the ability to think? Not in the way that supports freedom of speech (including the freedom to consume the speech of others). To this expert, the mind has the unfortunate capacity to obsessively consume notions and to distort and to generate emotions and impulses that are destructive to the body. TikTok is set to feed content in response to those obsessions and weird impulses, to cultivate them and to take them more deeply into irrationality.

Social media, like video games, seems to be developed to play to the primitive parts of our brain. Video game developers are ever improving their ability to use the game play loop to manipulate the feedback mechanisms that encourage us to continue playing ("just one more round/level/boss"). Likewise social media works on the parts of our brain that are tribal. It convinces us that we're surrounded by people like us, which makes us susceptible to group-think.; 6/22/20, 8:40 AM
Charlie Currie said...: Apparently, no one has succumbed to the siren call of anorexia before tictok.

Karen Carpenter was not available for comment.; 6/22/20, 8:59 AM
Sebastian said...: "Doesn't the expert credit the mind with the ability to think?"

Well, not if it engages in wrongthink. Which the expert will set straight, by doing the thinking for us. To be enforced by state power. Just so that nothing goes wrong. Progressivism 101.

So you observe progs at work. What do you see?

"Not in the way that supports freedom of speech"

It's so sad! Who would have thought? Doesn't everyone support freedom of speech?

So you observe no ostensible support for free speech. What do you see?; 6/22/20, 9:03 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Did you see the the Tik-Tok video homage to Tianemen Square guy? Nope. No you didn’t because the account was mysteriously disappeared That’s what happens when every byte goes through CCP servers. Same with Zoom. We’re now doing China's espionage for them, bit by bit. What could go wrong!; 6/22/20, 9:07 AM
daskol said...: Lockdowns so that the most physically vulnerable among us set the standard for physical space, and the most sensitive and humorless and neurotic among us must determine the freely available content in virtual space, because a bad idea in a video is just as dangerous to a potential anorectic as freely floating viral load is to grandma.; 6/22/20, 9:14 AM
rcocean said...: Again, why don't people write this sort of thing about boys and Young men? "Oh, we better not write this, because some young man might do the wrong thing"? Look, I don't mind if people want to protect young women because they're weak and mentally inferior. Just don't let them vote. Perhaps we need to change adulthood from 18 to 25 for women.; 6/22/20, 9:17 AM
rcocean said...: Censors ALWAYS claim to be protecting people and doing good. And that's especially true of the Left-wing censors. You'd think people would wise up, and see the game being played, but they never do.; 6/22/20, 9:19 AM
Todd said...: 'I think that the lack of transparency around how content is fed to different people through the app makes TikTok especially threatening, as none of us can be sure what content we will see and whether it will be safe for our mental wellbeing. One of the things that worries me most about TikTok is how the environment it provides is not guaranteed to be a safe one. We would never send young people into physical environments that might pose them with threats to their wellbeing, so why would we accept dangers in our digital environments either?'"

OK Zoomer...

When we were kids, we would leave the house at the crack of dawn on Saturday and play out-side all day. In the street, in the woods at the end of the street. Ride our bikes throughout the area, all the way into town and the main-street for soda and such. We were as young as 13 down to 8. Oh, and don't get the vapors but no bike-helmets either!

The only environment guaranteed to be safe is a coffin. Life is a threat to your wellbeing. Live is a danger, at least if you are doing it right. These people that want to treat everyone like they are these delicate porcelain butterflies that have to be constantly monitored and kept in bubblewrap so absolutely NOTHING can possibly cause them any harm are doing just that, causing harm. This is why we have these "safe spaces" and comfort animals and all this other "coshiony" crap that is all the rage today.

Sorry if it hurts your delicate feelings but "man up" already and grow a pair (this goes for EVERYONE). How the hell can you possibly take care of someone else (spouse, family, kids) if you are too delicate to take care of yourself? You have NO right to not be offended. You have NO right to not be exposed to "stuff". Don't like it? Change the channel, close the browser, shutdown the twitter, get off the Tik-Tok. Get a life.; 6/22/20, 9:22 AM
Owen said...: TikTok sounds like a bad drug: addictive and dangerous. But Darwin Awards are owed to all the snowflakes who find themselves hooked on their own anorexia and are trying to sell this tragic experience to the rest of us.; 6/22/20, 9:23 AM
Drago said...: "That’s what happens when every byte goes through CCP servers."

As ARM would describe it: A Digital Heaven; 6/22/20, 9:23 AM
Kevin said...: This is an argument against freedom of expression — seeing ideas as dangerous, rather than as something to be understood, contemplated, and accepted or rejected. Dangers to the mind are the same as dangers to the body.

Where would she get such an outlandish idea, the New York Times?

At what point do Times subscribers recognize they’re financially supporting these ideas?; 6/22/20, 9:28 AM
john said...: This is new to me. I did not know that "James Downs" was an eating disorder.; 6/22/20, 9:31 AM
JML said...: Most experts are idiots. By that, I mean they have a narrow frame of reference with, and expertise in a specific area. They cannot apply that in a big picture view of the world or system they operate in.

For example, narrow frame of mind: Shut down the economy to help prevent the spread of a virus. Big picture: Shutting down the economy will (perhaps) slow the spread of the virus, but what are the consequences of doing so? Etc.; 6/22/20, 9:32 AM
JAORE said...: Leftists eating their own is NOT a recommended diet.

But it does have entertainment value.; 6/22/20, 9:45 AM
Not Sure said...: I'll admit I'm not enthusiastic about freedom of expression for people who can't think.

The problem is being able to tell who they are without letting them express themselves.; 6/22/20, 9:45 AM
Kate said...: I'm with @buwaya. To "avoid the near occasion of sin" is a good idea. I know I'm vulnerable to certain content, that it will lead me to a damaging place, and I try to keep it away from me. (P0rn in my twitter feed, for instance.) I control what I see, via block/mute, and that's valuable.

Also, after the whole Trump rally tickets, I've become aware that maybe TikTok has an agenda. The CCP is going to pursue its own interests, and they probably don't align with mine. "Free speech" is not a magic get-out-of-jail card. I can ask questions and have doubts.; 6/22/20, 9:47 AM
bagoh20 said...: " We would never send young people into physical environments that might pose them with threats to their wellbeing, so why would we accept dangers in our digital environments either?'""

Then why would you ever send them to a University?

When the aliens finally come visit, they will find the human species pretty much as the Dutch found the Dodo bird: helpless, unprepared, and near extinction. They won't be able to save us, as we will barely be able to lift our heads due to physical weakness and a cranium full of shit. I'm hoping my fossil remains will end up in an alien museum along with a diorama showing a model of me and Raquel Welch frolicking in the stone age.; 6/22/20, 9:52 AM
Fernandinande said...: Bad ideas, questionable media, people offering such are to be shunned, and both the youth and the public need protection from these.

Burning people at the stake for heresy is a not a bad idea, nor should its adherents be shunned.

It takes a Special Person, however, to determine which ideas are bad, and which media are questionable, in order to prevent those "other people" from being corrupted by the words and ideas which the Special Person is not corrupted by.

The existence of those Special People and their good intentions is a romantic fantasy.; 6/22/20, 9:53 AM
Cheryl said...: I am tired of the relentless pursuit of "safe." I recently came across a quote I had written down several years before: "A ship is safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for." Brains are for thinking, not protecting.; 6/22/20, 9:53 AM
Fernandinande said...: Bad ideas, questionable media, people offering such are to be shunned, and both the youth and the public need protection from these.

Those are bad ideas.; 6/22/20, 9:55 AM
MayBee said...: Interesting is the Chinese algorithm that feeds anti-Trump rally info to the Kpop teens.; 6/22/20, 9:57 AM
Temujin said...: Social media- all of it from TikTok to Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, You Tube, and others- have taught people to not think, but to feel. These are emotion driven entities. They thrive, gain more power, from people's emotions. If there is thought, it's carefully orchestrated to be uniform, of one hive-mind, and those that diverge from the hive must eventually be censored or destroyed.

They are teaching entire generations to quit thinking, just keep feeling. And they will direct you on what to feel, how you should feel about things, and eventually, what you should say and think about those things. That nagging little question in the back of the article author's mind shows that there is still some work to do from the social media outlets. Can't have stray thoughts questioning things, can we?.

1984 was not supposed to be a how-to manual. But we're getting there, willingly. As if in a rush to do so.; 6/22/20, 9:59 AM
Mary Beth said...: Expect the user to think? That's victim blaming!

(Not really, but that's how media/social media would react.); 6/22/20, 10:02 AM
MayBee said...: Do we think you can convince yourself that you are fat, even though it is plain to everyone that you are starving yourself, by looking at social media posts,
But you can not convince yourself that you are a different gender, even though it is plain to everyone that you are one gender, by looking at social media posts?

What can social media convince you of? What thoughts can we have about ourselves that are important to act upon, and which are important to realize they are harmful? Who decides?; 6/22/20, 10:06 AM
Ron Winkleheimer said...: "'I think that the lack of transparency around how content is fed to different people through the app makes TikTok especially threatening, as none of us can be sure what content we will see and whether it will be safe for our mental wellbeing.'"

First, every content provider on the internet operates that way. If I watch a calisthenic movement video on youtube, suddenly I see bunches of exercise videos. On Netflix and Amazon Prime there are suggestions on what content you might like "because you watched" whatever. Amazon suggests books and goods based on what books and goods I have bought or just looked at. Its actually the digitization of basic human behavior. Back when shopkeepers knew their customers they would make suggestions.

Second, the idea that wanting to improve yourself physically is the same as having an eating disorder is pernicious nonsense. Maybe she needed that fitness gear and plan. People should be encouraged to exercise. The fat acceptance movement is an attempt to remove the stigma around gluttony and stigmatize self-control.

Third, its self-defeating as a society to try to protect a tiny minority from some possible harm by denying the majority access to information and opinions. Even before the internet, information sought to be free.; 6/22/20, 10:18 AM
LA_Bob said...: "...makes TikTok especially threatening, as none of us can be sure what content we will see and whether it will be safe for our mental wellbeing.

In the past, if you didn't like the picture, you closed the book or magazine. With movies in the theatre, you can close your eyes. With TV you can change the channel. But with TikTokOrange, you're forced to watch those emotionally threatening videos. That's technology for you!

"TikTok says it will take down any content that promotes unhealthy relationships with food."

Speaking of unhealthy relationships with food... Viewer discretion advised.; 6/22/20, 10:35 AM
walter said...: "James Downs, an eating disorder and mental health campaigner,"
Oh..perhaps the degree of "triggering" of anonymous/invisible teen is proportionate to her proportions.; 6/22/20, 10:45 AM
Richard Dolan said...: "Doesn't the expert credit the mind with the ability to think?"

Synedoche or mereological fallacy? Or just reflexive mind-body dichotomy stuff?; 6/22/20, 11:29 AM
Sterling said...: I don't think you know how anorexia works...; 6/22/20, 11:49 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: I am supposed to feel alarmed that an adult somewhere is obsessively watching stupid videos? I'm not. Maybe she should stop and/or get counseling.; 6/22/20, 1:11 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: The nation is hardly experiencing a crisis of being too thin.; 6/22/20, 1:13 PM
hstad said...: This article is a joke right? If 40% of her time is defined as her waking hours - WOW! I would only barely describe her as a woman but does she have a job? If so, that means she's as bad as the soy boys (in their Mom's basement)and their idiotic time spend on 'online war games'. I feel for this generation and their lack of value adding to their society - unbelievable.; 6/22/20, 3:51 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I Lyfted what appeared to me as a morbidly obese woman to a doctors visit accompanied by her young daughter. They were both ver talkative thru the short ride. The daughter manner of speech sounded mortified to me. nervous laughter at the end of every high pitch sentence, that sort of thing. i drove off believing the daughter was being physiologically abused. there was also a younger daughter who stayed behind.; 6/22/20, 3:59 PM
Paul Doty said...: That seems normal and healthy. And just think, we now know this about this woman. How stunning and brave.; 6/22/20, 4:30 PM
Achilles said...: Tik Tok is an evil company run by evil people doing evil things.

Providing a company like that with content or with viewer time is supporting evil.

Just so long as that is clear carry on linking to them.; 6/22/20, 7:58 PM
Achilles said...: Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
Did you see the the Tik-Tok video homage to Tianemen Square guy? Nope. No you didn’t because the account was mysteriously disappeared That’s what happens when every byte goes through CCP servers. Same with Zoom. We’re now doing China's espionage for them, bit by bit. What could go wrong!

The attacks on freedom and the individual citizen will never end.

But the attacks must be defeated.; 6/22/20, 8:02 PM
Achilles said...: Freeman Hunt said...
I am supposed to feel alarmed that an adult somewhere is obsessively watching stupid videos? I'm not. Maybe she should stop and/or get counseling.

This would actually be a good use for Machine Learning Algorithms.

We should have enough labeled data on people with eating disorders and who have attempted/succeeded in committing suicide to detect some of that shit by viewing patterns.

Alas the people who created Tik Tok or more interested in pushing Chi Com propaganda that doing any actual societal good.; 6/22/20, 8:05 PM
Iman said...: You down with CCP, yeah you know she!; 6/22/20, 8:16 PM
Kirk Parker said...: "Ideas are more powerful than weapons. We don't let our people have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"

--J. Stalin; 6/22/20, 9:02 PM
CaroWalk said...: Safe safe safe...our culture’s new obsession with safety...this is the Matriarchal utopia, people.; 6/22/20, 9:20 PM