Social media, self esteem: What's the connection?
Megan Moreno,
Tribune News Service
Ever since social media burst on the scene in the early 2000s, parents and health experts have worried about the potential impact on kids, particularly those in their early teens. Now researchers are asking how the curated content that kids see online makes them feel about themselves. Newer studies show that picture-perfect selfies and videos on Instagram, TikTok and other social media platforms can shake a young person's confidence. Kids who compare their authentic lives to these unreal images may find themselves feeling anxiety, envy and sometimes obsessive thoughts that can harm their health. Celebrities and influencers work hard to attract social followers — usually with an army of stylists, makeup artists, trainers and videographers helping them. But thanks to filters and photo editing tools like Facetune and others, kids may feel they can make themselves look perfect too. More than 70% of social media users refuse to post pictures online before Photoshopping them, one study shows.
This desire to erase all flaws can be especially harmful for kids of colour. Research shows that photo editing apps often use beauty standards modelled on white people, reinforcing racist views of what's attractive and what's not. Setting goals and striving to meet them can be good for kids. But extreme content on social media can push them toward unrealistic standards that encourage dangerous habits. Some trends fueled by social media reflect unhealthy body images. This includes trends such as bigorexia, which drives young people to spend countless hours in the gym and eat a protein-heavy diet to build a 'jacked' body, or ultra-low-calorie eating plans displayed in 'what I eat in a day' videos posted by celebrities and influencers.
Social platforms are designed to keep kids scrolling by serving up the content they like best. Most social media platforms use an algorithm to track what users view and watch to deliver similar content. This means that a teen who views unhealthy content out of curiosity may be shown more and more content of that type. It can become nearly impossible for them to outrun the images and stories that can drive compulsive behaviours. Social media's overall impact on an individual child is fueled by several factors. This includes their temperament, personality, health status, peer group and the content they view. However, it is also important to keep an eye on ways that social media can crowd out healthy behaviours that are also critical to mental health and self-esteem.
For example, social media can contribute to reduced quality and quantity of sleep. It can also crowd out other important responsibilities such as schoolwork and time with family and friends. Even kids who don't fall into harmful eating or workout regimes may experience this crowding out of healthy behaviors and habits.
Here are some suggestions from the American Academy of Pediatrics Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health that can help your child use social media in positive ways to learn, connect and grow. The first step is to engage in open communication. Kids often resist any move adults make to curb their freedom, so aim for a nonjudgmental approach. Ask your child to guide you by asking questions like what types of media they have been enjoying lately or simply asking if any content they've come across worries them or makes them uncomfortable.
As your child opens up, try to listen more than talk. Make this a learning session that will help you uncover possible concerns and topics for future conversations. You don't have to 'solve' everything about social media in one conversation; the goal is to keep the lines of communication open over time. You may find your child knows a lot about the inner workings of the digital world. Still, they may not think too deeply about the content 'bubble' that algorithms create. If they're willing, try this experiment: Open your own social platform and search for something new. For example, if your feed focuses on sports or fashion, search for 'home improvement' or 'coin collecting.' Within a few clicks, you'll start to see new content on those topics.
If your child is showing signs they have been comparing themselves to the unattainable content they see online, it may help to acknowledge that comparing ourselves to others is natural, but perfectionism can harm us. Pointing to examples from your own life may be helpful. For example: 'I used to watch hours of videos showing how to improve my tennis swing. But in the end, it just made me feel nervous about my game. Going out and practicing worked a lot better.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
14 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Social media, self esteem: What's the connection?
Megan Moreno, Tribune News Service Ever since social media burst on the scene in the early 2000s, parents and health experts have worried about the potential impact on kids, particularly those in their early teens. Now researchers are asking how the curated content that kids see online makes them feel about themselves. Newer studies show that picture-perfect selfies and videos on Instagram, TikTok and other social media platforms can shake a young person's confidence. Kids who compare their authentic lives to these unreal images may find themselves feeling anxiety, envy and sometimes obsessive thoughts that can harm their health. Celebrities and influencers work hard to attract social followers — usually with an army of stylists, makeup artists, trainers and videographers helping them. But thanks to filters and photo editing tools like Facetune and others, kids may feel they can make themselves look perfect too. More than 70% of social media users refuse to post pictures online before Photoshopping them, one study shows. This desire to erase all flaws can be especially harmful for kids of colour. Research shows that photo editing apps often use beauty standards modelled on white people, reinforcing racist views of what's attractive and what's not. Setting goals and striving to meet them can be good for kids. But extreme content on social media can push them toward unrealistic standards that encourage dangerous habits. Some trends fueled by social media reflect unhealthy body images. This includes trends such as bigorexia, which drives young people to spend countless hours in the gym and eat a protein-heavy diet to build a 'jacked' body, or ultra-low-calorie eating plans displayed in 'what I eat in a day' videos posted by celebrities and influencers. Social platforms are designed to keep kids scrolling by serving up the content they like best. Most social media platforms use an algorithm to track what users view and watch to deliver similar content. This means that a teen who views unhealthy content out of curiosity may be shown more and more content of that type. It can become nearly impossible for them to outrun the images and stories that can drive compulsive behaviours. Social media's overall impact on an individual child is fueled by several factors. This includes their temperament, personality, health status, peer group and the content they view. However, it is also important to keep an eye on ways that social media can crowd out healthy behaviours that are also critical to mental health and self-esteem. For example, social media can contribute to reduced quality and quantity of sleep. It can also crowd out other important responsibilities such as schoolwork and time with family and friends. Even kids who don't fall into harmful eating or workout regimes may experience this crowding out of healthy behaviors and habits. Here are some suggestions from the American Academy of Pediatrics Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health that can help your child use social media in positive ways to learn, connect and grow. The first step is to engage in open communication. Kids often resist any move adults make to curb their freedom, so aim for a nonjudgmental approach. Ask your child to guide you by asking questions like what types of media they have been enjoying lately or simply asking if any content they've come across worries them or makes them uncomfortable. As your child opens up, try to listen more than talk. Make this a learning session that will help you uncover possible concerns and topics for future conversations. You don't have to 'solve' everything about social media in one conversation; the goal is to keep the lines of communication open over time. You may find your child knows a lot about the inner workings of the digital world. Still, they may not think too deeply about the content 'bubble' that algorithms create. If they're willing, try this experiment: Open your own social platform and search for something new. For example, if your feed focuses on sports or fashion, search for 'home improvement' or 'coin collecting.' Within a few clicks, you'll start to see new content on those topics. If your child is showing signs they have been comparing themselves to the unattainable content they see online, it may help to acknowledge that comparing ourselves to others is natural, but perfectionism can harm us. Pointing to examples from your own life may be helpful. For example: 'I used to watch hours of videos showing how to improve my tennis swing. But in the end, it just made me feel nervous about my game. Going out and practicing worked a lot better.'
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Gulf Today
Are you guilty of wellness bypassing? Probably
Sam Parker, The Independent I once lived a perfect day. It started with sitting cross-legged by an open window for 30 minutes of meditation, with morning light beaming vitamin D directly into my face. After that, it was time to stretch: one, two, three sun salutations, timing the movement of my limbs to long, deep breaths. In the shower, I slowly turned the warm water to cold in order to flood my system with endorphins, before stepping out and repeating a round of positive affirmations into the mirror. In the evening, I chewed my dinner mindfully before switching on the TV. Then, two hours before bed, I put away all my screens and lit some candles. By the flickering flames, I wrote down all my worries in a journal and bullet-pointed how I'd tackle them the next day, before listing the multitudinous reasons I had in my life to be deeply, truly grateful. With eight full hours left before I needed to be up again, I lay down on my pillow, closed my eyes, took a round of deep, calming breaths and finally... panicked. The lure of the wellness industry can be incredibly strong, particularly if you suffer from anxiety. All my life I had experienced periods of vague, oppressive dread that could make entire weeks a misery, and in recent years, it had started to feel like the solution was only ever one more swipe away. My algorithm served up an endless well of gurus advocating journalling or diaphragmatic breathing or running in your underwear through the frozen tundras of Norway. I dabbled in all of it (OK, not the Norway one), figuring if I just landed on the perfectly optimised mental health routine, I'd banish my doom for good. The fact that no combination of these activities seemed to work made me quietly fear I might be broken, that anxiety was simply my lot in life. In 1984, the American psychotherapist John Welwood coined the phrase 'spiritual bypassing'. He used it to describe people in the hippie movement who used then-exotic practices like yoga and meditation as a substitute for working on deeper problems with their mental health. There is a 'widespread tendency', he warned, 'to use spiritual ideas and practices to sidestep or avoid facing unresolved emotional issues (and) psychological wounds'. Welwood believed psychology and spiritualism could complement each other, but said he saw too many people trying to shortcut their way to inner peace and 'rise above the raw and messy side of [their] humanness before (they) have fully faced and made peace with it'. Fifty years on, we are now living in an age of wellness bypassing. The global wellness industry is worth $5.6 trillion, buoyed by an endless tide of Instagram-friendly self-care tips often presented as quick fixes for low moods, depression or anxiety. In many cases, the science backing them is spurious at best. An investigation published by The Guardian last week found that more than 50 per cent of the top trending videos offering mental health advice on TikTok contain misinformation. These spanned misleading claims about the powers of saffron and magnesium glycinate to dubious methods promising to 'heal trauma within an hour'. One theory posited that you can reduce anxiety by eating an orange in the shower (surely only true if you're anxious about having sticky fingers while you eat fruit). Jevin D West is the co-author of a book called Calling Bullshit: The Art of Scepticism in a Date-Driven World and leads research teams attempting to fight back against misinformation online. Health and wellness, West tells me, is the biggest problem area of all. 'Nothing comes even close to its ability to attract people's attention and convince them to let their guard down,' he says. 'There is the outright disinformation, of course, that has an intentional element. But a huge part of what we've seen is misleading content. Maybe it has some elements of truth. It might even be citing relevant science. But often, it's about an area there isn't much research on.' Take shilajit, for example, the tar-like supplement purported to boost testosterone. West's number one piece of advice for consuming online content is an oldie but a goodie: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Healing your decades-old family trauma by 'cozymaxxing' is probably not going to cut it. But he acknowledges that, even for savvy social media users, this can be incredibly difficult to follow. 'Because we want to be convinced,' he says. 'We want that elixir that can fix this emotional issue we might have. We want to believe.' We also want to belong.
Gulf Today
4 days ago
- Gulf Today
MAHA report's errors are just start of its problems
Lisa Jarvis and Michael Hiltzik, Tribune News Service Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s new Make America Healthy Again report offers a road to wellness for the nation's children paved not with the gold-standard science he promised, but with pyrite. The report, created by a MAHA commission that includes all of President Donald Trump's cabinet members, mixes nuggets of truth — like the idea that it's important to focus on kids' health — with gross misrepresentations of scientific research. Some of the studies are even made up. The nonprofit news organisation Notus first reported that some of the commission's findings relied on research that doesn't exist. The document, released last week, includes seven fabricated studies related to kids' mental health and the overprescribing of medications for ADHD, depression and asthma. The New York Times later identified several other fake citations. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt attributed the inclusion of phony publications to 'formatting issues' that would be corrected. An updated report that omits those studies and cleans up bizarre errors in several others has since been uploaded to the White House website. That version contained fresh errors, Notus reported. Many suspect that the fake citations are the product of AI. That alone should be disqualifying. Rather than the thoughtful, evidence-based assessment our kids deserve, the first major report on Kennedy's cornerstone initiative was a slapped-together treatise. But there's a bigger problem. If the MAHA team did rely on AI to generate supporting data — and it seems likely it did — it wasn't just cutting corners. It confirms this project was never a good faith effort to begin with. The team was assembling evidence to reinforce conclusions that supported Kennedy's well-known narrative. That pattern is bolstered by the report's interpretation of the real studies it cites. Data is conveniently twisted to fit Kennedy's personal beliefs. A recurring tendency is to exaggerate the size of the current problem by minimising the significance of those in the past. For example, the report points to a fivefold rise in the rates of celiac disease since the 1980s but fails to acknowledge a dramatic increase in diagnosis and awareness of the autoimmune disorder. The same is true for the report's discussions of inflammatory bowel disease, childhood cancer and autism. None of this should be surprising. In nearly every interview he gives, Kennedy repeats the same inflated statistics to drive home the terrible state of our kids' health. His goal seems to be to scare the public into acquiescence. If the problem is this bad, if our kids are this sick, if health agencies have failed them this profoundly, why not blindly follow his ideas for fixing it? Something more insidious is at play with all of the half-baked or made-up statistics. He is using them to undermine the real experts, making it increasingly hard for Americans to understand whose advice to trust. And ultimately, his willfully misleading analysis provides cover while he dismantles longstanding norms for scientific research and health policy. In just a few short months, the secretary has wielded his authority in unprecedented and dangerous ways. For example, amid the largest measles outbreak in 30 years, instead of emphasising vaccines — which can prevent the disease — he asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to develop guidelines for treatments. There are no proven treatments for measles. At least three people have died, and nearly 1,100 cases of the disease have been reported. In another disturbing move, Kennedy said he would unilaterally change the CDC's COVID vaccine guidelines to preclude pregnant women and children from receiving shots. That upended the longstanding process that relies on outside experts' careful analysis and open debate before making such decisions. Days later, the CDC amended its regulations to incorporate some, but not all of Kennedy's proposed changes, leaving many confused not only about the actual policy but who sets it. We should worry that his approach to measles and COVID is a preview of how he will treat the value of other routine shots. One of the most alarming sections of the report questions the evidence behind and safety of the childhood vaccine schedule and — without evidence — suggests it could be linked to chronic disease. Kennedy has also used his platform to push policy changes on the use of fluoride in drinking water, which he has repeatedly linked to lower IQs (a tenuous claim that experts say is based on fluoride levels not used in the US). Fluoridation is regulated by state and local municipalities, but Kennedy said he would direct the CDC to stop recommending the practice and the Food and Drug Administration — also under his purview — later banned fluoride supplements based on unsubstantiated claims that they harm gut health. His rhetoric on the topic appears to have emboldened the first two state bans on fluoride in public water. The MAHA report's agenda suggests more changes are to come. Meanwhile, new research in JAMA found that removing fluoride from drinking water would result in 25 million more cavities in children at a cost of $9.8 billion to the US healthcare system over five years. Kennedy's next move appears to be wresting control of health and science research altogether. 'We're probably going to stop publishing in the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and those other journals because they're all corrupt,' he said on a recent podcast with wellness influencer Gary Brecka. Unless those top-tier journals 'change dramatically,' health agencies will 'create our own journals in-house,' he added. In other words, he'll have a ready-made platform to showcase data that justifies whatever policy he wants to roll out next. In another troubling sign of how data could be warped to fit a political agenda, President Donald Trump signed an executive order after the report was released directing a restoration of 'gold standard science.' The goal sounds reasonable enough: to ensure research is reproducible and reverse a decline in public trust in science and health agencies. But the language of the directive is concerning. It not only challenges the credibility of several agencies — including the CDC — but suggests someone like Kennedy could exploit the language of research integrity to crack down on findings that don't fit his personal agenda. Kennedy has called the MAHA report 'the diagnosis' and says he will 'deliver the prescription' in the next 60 days. Given what we've seen over the last few months, we should worry what form that takes — and the far reaching consequences it could have on both American kids and the health infrastructure designed to protect them. Earlier, serious followers of healthcare policy in the US didn't expect much good to emerge from its takeover by President Donald Trump and his secretary of Health and Human Services, the anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. But the agency and its leadership managed to live down to the worst expectations May 27, when HHS released a 73-page 'assessment' of the health of America's children titled 'The MAHA Report' (for 'Make America Healthy Again'). A sloppier, more disingenuous government report would be hard to imagine. Whatever credibility the report might have had as a product of a federal agency was shattered by its obvious errors, misrepresentations and outright fabrications of source materials, some of it plainly the product of the authors' reliance on AI bots. At least seven sources cited in the report do not exist, as Emily Kennard and Margaret Manto of the journalism organisation NOTUS uncovered. HHS hastily reissued the report with some of those citations removed, but without disclosing the changes — an extremely unkosher action in the research community.
