This is an ignorant assumption about the author's motives that doesn't withstand even the least bit of scrutiny. Meta came first under Haidt's crosshairs and has been targeted since this article was released. Snapchat was targeted with a partner piece to this one yesterday:
There wasn't much to them, but yes. The second comment asked a question which I'd already answered, which is why I'm wondering if you read it and followed the link to the article targeting Snapchat.
I can respond again if your attention span has been shot by too much TikTok:
> Then why isn't the article "Social Media Is Harming Children at an Industrial Scale?" USAID checks?
Because he already wrote many, many articles to that effect and wanted to write one on TikTok specifically. Then he followed it up with one on Snapchat specifically.
Social media harming children is his whole thing. He's written a lot of content on it.
Meta has towering mountains of criticism and legal issues against them. For the most part it just doesn't involve kids, as kids don't really use their platform.
