by francopoli

Very next article after the previous one. warning auto-play video, thanks BBC.

Over a third (40%) of the 554 people who voted thought that more than two or three hours was too much, but we know that most people spend at least two hours social networking and messaging every day. The majority of internet users do not have pathological relationships with social media, which surely means that two or three hours probably isn’t too much at all. We know that over a third of UK 15-year-olds use the internet for six or more hours a day, with much of that time dedicated to social networking sites. Despite their heavy consumption, such heavy use does not mean these young people are mentally unwell. Time spent online is only one factor. There are clearly other things to consider.

The same World Health Organization that is trying to claim being single is a disability and wants to put limits on video game play time, but not TV. What is completely lost in the article is that 16 year olds, boys in particular are not watching television. Old article. Spoiler, TV is for old people If people were playing 4 hour a day of games, and watching 4-6 hours a day of television, I think we would have a problem that needs addressing. Instead we are at the point of the shift where one medium is dying and a new one is replacing it. When I was home, the family watches TV ALL THE DAMN TIME. It's all shit. All of it. And from the commercials, the age they think they can target is 60. I did not see a single ad in two weeks on "normie" TV for people under 30 or so targeted. I know it has to be out there, and my parents watch prime time TV (some crime shows) and I also get that my sample is way skewed off normal. Daytime TV? Ads for Medicare and old people drugs. Fox News? Commercials selling fear, panic and social security. HGTV? Applebees.

Will be interesting to see what Hubski's take on this article is.