How to Identify Propaganda From Big Tech When You See It

Written By Christina Dinur

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew, and X CEO Linda Yaccarino testifying before a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on Jan. 31, 2024, to discuss child safety online.

Spreading awareness about social media’s harmful impact on children and teens is challenging when you’re up against powerful, multi-billion dollar corporations who do not want this message to be heard. But that is our reality. We live in a world where big tech exerts influence over many of our country’s most prominent children’s advocacy and health organizations, including Common Sense Media (funded by the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative), Boston Children’s Digital Wellness Lab (funded by Snap Inc., TikTok, Roblox, and Character AI), Girl Scouts (funded by Meta), the National PTA (funded by Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and Discord), and many others. Much of the digital wellness guidance provided by tech-funded organizations benefits Silicon Valley more than children, and this is no coincidence.

As David Michaels, author of The Triumph of Doubt: Dark Money and the Science of Deception has pointed out, “We have to have systems where unconflicted experts examine the data because if you have a financial relationship with companies, whether it's football, whether it's a chemical, whether it's alcohol, I think there's a lot of evidence that you can't see what is obviously there and that can be seen by people who are unconflicted.”

In today’s era of information overload, it can be challenging to know which sources to trust and which have a conflict of interest. The good news is that propaganda from the tech lobby is pretty easy to spot once you know what to look for. Here are some tips to help you evaluate digital safety guidance, no matter where it’s coming from, with a critical eye.

Distinguish Screen Time Myths from Reality

Certain talking points emerge again and again in “digital wellness” guidance that is influenced or funded by social media companies. These talking points are actually nothing more than myths created by the consumer tech industry to serve their own interests. Whenever you encounter one of the myths below, there’s a good chance the tech lobby is behind it, and you should question their guidance.

Myth #1: Children’s lives have largely moved online now and there’s no going back.

Examples:

"Instagram and other social media apps are where [teens] express themselves, hang out with friends, explore ideas, grow and learn.”—Parent & Guardian Guide to Instagram (endorsed and promoted by the National PTA) 

“For kids, digital life is real life. It's where they build friendships, take a stand on issues, and do so much more.”—Common Sense Media 

Reality check: Just because something has been normalized in society, doesn’t automatically make it good, and it certainly doesn’t mean we can’t change it. There are many historical examples of this. Accepting the status quo in which kids’ spend an enormous portion of their waking hours glued to screens at the expense of healthier real world activities isn’t our only option. If this status quo isn’t working for your family, you can push back by limiting screen time in your home, delaying tablets, smartphones, and social media, and accepting that use of these technologies is actually optional, even for adults!

Myth #2: Limiting kids’ and teens’ digital access does more harm than good.

Examples:

“There should be no time limits on screens because that leads to deprivation and rebellion.”—Michael Rich, Director and Founder of the Boston Children’s Digital Wellness Lab

“Conflict over screens is likely to be more harmful to adolescents’ mental health than screen time itself.”—Common Sense Media

“Taking away a device or banning an app is rarely the right way to respond."—Parent & Guardian Guide to Instagram (endorsed and promoted by the National PTA) 

“It can be tempting to want a set number of hours on screens that is ‘safe’ or healthy to guide your family’s technology use. Unfortunately, there isn’t enough evidence demonstrating a benefit from specific screen time limitation guidelines.”—American Academy of Pediatrics current screen time guidelines (pediatrician Megan Moreno, who has received funding from Facebook, was the lead author of these guidelines)

Reality check: How does advising parents to be permissive about their kids’ screen time square with decades of research showing that kids benefit most from an authoritative parenting style, i.e., one that involves firm limits? What would happen if we applied this advice to other risky teen activities, like underage drinking? Finally, given the staggering opportunity cost of kids ages 8-12 averaging 4-6 hours of screen time per day and teens averaging up to 9 hours per day (AACAP), does it really make sense for parents not to worry about limiting screen time?

Myth #3: Teens can be taught how to use social media in a balanced, intentional way.

Examples:

“A healthy approach to digital usage is all about balance.”—Meta digital wellness guide

"If we do our job as parents...we can steer our children toward beneficial online experiences and help them benefit from this way of communicating."—Parent & Guardian Guide to Instagram (endorsed and promoted by the National PTA)

“Encourage your teen to develop healthy habits around their digital use…Emphasizing balance—both online and offline—can help teens manage their time and energy more effectively.”—Digital Wellness Lab

“[Digital leadership] badges teach girls to be responsible and safe online, manage their screen time, identify misinformation, and how to spot clickbait while using technology to connect and lead.”—Girl Scouts

“Adolescents should limit use of social media for social comparison, particularly around beauty- or appearance-related content.”—American Psychological Association

Reality check: Every time we log onto a social media platform, engineers behind the screen are manipulating our behavior through persuasive design features (like the infinite scroll, constant push notifications, gamification, dopamine-fueling short videos, etc.) to keep us scrolling as long as possible—not because this is healthy, but because this is how the industry increases profits. This factual information is conspicuously absent from most consumer tech-funded “digital wellness” and “digital literacy” resources.

Many adults struggle to set healthy boundaries around their use of persuasively designed platforms, so why would we expect teens to be able to do so? What if instead of expecting teens to use social media platforms that were designed to be addictive in a “responsible” way, social media companies simply made their platforms less addictive? What if instead of telling teen girls not to use social media for “social comparison,” social media companies got rid of the features that make social comparison the entire point of their platforms? Finally, what if, rather than relying on willpower alone to manage our usage of these addictive, health-harming platforms in a “balanced” way (an exercise in futility for many people), we broke the status quo and normalized opting out of persuasively designed tech like social media altogether?

Ask Yourself Who Will Benefit If You Follow a Particular “Digital Wellness” Guideline

This one is pretty simple. When you encounter advice about digital wellness, ask yourself who will benefit if you adopt it. If the answer is “social media companies,” proceed with caution, because the goals of the consumer tech industry (increasing profits) and parents (raising healthy, flourishing kids) are often in conflict.

You can try this with each of the myths above. 

  1. Who benefits when we accept the status quo that “digital life is real life” for kids nowadays? Kids, who need lots of real world play and independence to thrive, or the social media companies determined to monetize kids’ attention?

  2. Who benefits when parents don’t limit their children’s screen time? Kids, who need firm limits and confident leadership from their parents to flourish, or social media companies who, again, want to monetize kids’ attention?

  3. Who benefits when the onus is on teens to use addictive, health-harming products like social media “responsibly,” rather than on social media companies to make their products safe? Teens, who have been set up to fail in this system, or social media companies, who are free from accountability?

Follow the Money

As psychologist Richard Freed demonstrates in Better Than Real Life: How Silicon Valley’s Secret Science of Persuasive Design Is Stealing Childhood, “key bodies that profess to protect kids’ from unhealthy technology have aligned, often financially, with the consumer tech industry. This has undermined parents’ and other caregivers’ ability to understand the harm being done to young people by persuasively designed consumer technologies. It also has enabled Silicon Valley’s takeover of childhood.”

As parents, we should make it a best practice to look into the funding sources of the digital safety experts and organizations we follow because the consumer tech industry is counting on us not taking the time out of our busy lives to do this. The Tech Transparency Project has a handy database of hundreds of nonprofits that are tech funded, and we’ve also compiled a short list of children’s health organizations with financial ties to the consumer tech industry below.

Use Caution When Reviewing Digital Safety Guidance from the Following Consumer Tech-Funded Children’s Health Organizations (this is not an exhaustive list): 

At SFCxUS, we are fighting back against Silicon Valley’s takeover of childhood by calling out conflicts of interest when we see them (for example, we asked the National PTA to stop partnering with Meta in a community letter that was signed by over 370 PTA presidents, PTA members, parents, mental health experts, medical professionals, child-advocacy leaders, and best-selling authors) and by offering and amplifying digital safety resources created by experts who are not funded or influenced by consumer tech corporations. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay updated!

Christina Dinur
Next

SFCxUS Invited to Speak About Phones in Schools at Yale Education Leadership Conference