I think it's disingenuous to say "Suicide rates are up, so it must be this one factor I've found." I also wish you'd do a little analysis for your audience on the studies you're showing us, and a little more work reading your own articles. I found the following list from references in your provided studies:
Reinforcement or Displacement? the Reciprocity of FTF, IM, and SNS Communication and Their Effects on Loneliness and Life Satisfaction:
Does communication on social network sites (SNSs) or instant messengers (IMs) reinforce or displace face-to-face (FtF) communication, and how do the 3 channels affect loneliness and life satisfaction? Using cross-lagged structural equation modeling in a longitudinal and representative sample from Germany, we found that SNS communication increased both FtF and IM communication 6 months later. Likewise, IM communication at T1 increased SNS communication at T2. FtF, SNS, and IM communication did not affect loneliness, and FtF and IM communication did not change life satisfaction. However, communication on SNSs slightly increased life satisfaction. Thus, the data indicated that conversing via SNSs and IM has a mainly reinforcing effect and that communicating via SNSs can enhance life satisfaction several months later.
How does online social networking enhance life satisfaction?:
The purpose of this study is to examine whether supportive interactions on social networking sites mediate the influence of SNS use and the number of SNS friends on perceived social support, affect, sense of community, and life satisfaction. Employing momentary sampling, the current study also looked at the relationship between supportive interaction and immediate affect after the interaction over a period of 5 days. An analysis of 339 adult participants revealed a positive relationship between supportive interaction and positive affect after the interaction.
Friend Networking Sites and Their Relationship to Adolescents' Well-Being and Social Self-Esteem.:
We conducted a survey among 881 adolescents (10-19-year-olds) who had an online profile on a Dutch friend networking site. Using structural equation modeling, we found that the frequency with which adolescents used the site had an indirect effect on their social self-esteem and well-being. The use of the friend networking site stimulated the number of relationships formed on the site, the frequency with which adolescents received feedback on their profiles, and the tone (i.e., positive vs. negative) of this feedback. Positive feedback on the profiles enhanced adolescents' social self-esteem and well-being, whereas negative feedback decreased their self-esteem and well-being.
(This one isn't "Social Media Good!", but it clearly shows that the research is not unanimous)
Screen time and young children: Promoting health and development in a digital world.:
Beginning at about 2 years, quality TV—well-designed, age-appropriate programs with specific educational goals—can provide an additional route to early language and literacy for children. Quality programming also fosters aspects of cognitive development, including positive racial attitudes and imaginative play. Early evidence suggests that interactive media, specifically applications that involve contingent responses from an adult (i.e., timely reactions to what a child says or does), can help children retain taught information. This responsiveness, when coupled with age-appropriate content, timing and intensity of action, can teach new words to 24-month-olds. There is early evidence that interactive ‘learn-to-read’ apps and e-books can build early literacy by providing practice with letters, phonics and word recognition. However, while screens may help with language learning when quality content is co-viewed and discussed with a parent or caregiver, preschoolers learn best (i.e., in expressive and vocabulary terms) from live, direct and dynamic interactions with caring adults.
Development and validation of the Problematic Media Use Measure: A parent report measure of screen media “addiction” in children.
The current study reports on the development and validation of a parent-report measure of one potential aspect of children’s problematic use—screen media addiction—via the Problematic Media Use Measure (PMUM). Items were based on the 9 criteria for Internet gaming disorder in the DSM–5.
“Typically, researchers and clinicians quantify or consider the amount of screen time as of paramount importance in determining what is normal or not normal or healthy or unhealthy,” said lead author Sarah Domoff, who did the research while a postdoctoral research fellow at University of Michigan Center for Human Growth and Development.
“Our study has demonstrated that there is more to it than number of hours. What matters most is whether screen use causes problems in other areas of life or has become an all-consuming activity.”
Now...Why am I leaving such a huge comment in a thread like this? Because I wanted this to be a space for discussion rather than a list of articles you agree with and a declaration that discussion is over.
The research isn't unanimous, and it isn't finished. We know that excessive screen-time is bad, but with caveats - that it can be beneficial in small doses, that some types of screen-time aren't bad, and that it can actually have a positive affect on sociability under specific circumstances. I want this discussion to be nuanced. More nuanced than "The research is unanimous, screens are bad."
Let's talk about benefits, detriments, and our personal experiences if we're going to talk at all. Let's not say "Suicide is up, and I blame technology."