Before the advent of social media, children used to disrupt classrooms with lively discussions; now, they are quietly distracted scrolling through TikTok and Instagram reels, turning into slaves to the algorithm. 
We’ve all heard the usual arguments: social media deprives you of your attention span, increases self-esteem issues, decreases human interaction and is a terrible addition to society. But despite knowing these risks, many continue to spend hours every day scrolling to the next reel.
Fortunately, the studies that discovered these “risks” are not absolute — in fact, this field is so new that there is no overarching definition for what exactly “social media” even is. 
Social media is by no means entirely good and pure, but then again, few things in the world are. What it is is unfairly blamed for shortcomings. 
Let’s take a look at a few of the key arguments against the use of social media. One is it greatly impacts self-esteem. However, social media is not the cause of self-esteem problems — the content consumed on it is. 
Those two are not the same. Yes, people are exposed to images and narratives that promote unhealthy and over-glamorized lifestyles. But to blame social media for causing self-esteem issues is the equivalent of blaming school for causing bullying. Yes, schools do enable bullying simply by throwing many children together into a classroom, and certain school policies can make bullying better or worse. But to blame the entire system for actions individuals take is extreme.
Similarly, social media allows for a globally connected society, and while previously content and communication may have been limited to a county or city, we can now access content from the entire world — for free. 
Self-esteem issues have always been a part of society. In “Little Women”, a book written over 100 years ago, sisters Amy and Meg are self-conscious about their appearance. In more recent media, “Mean Girls” features a scene where the main friend group lines up in front of a mirror and critiques their seemingly perfect appearances. Unrealistic expectations have always existed, and social media merely gives more avenues to access unrealistic images that people were clearly accessing anyway.
In that same vein, polarization is often an argument against social media. Unfortunately, polarization is inevitable in an interconnected world. The people you talk to are likely those who share the same values as you. But this is also true in small populations. How many of your friends share the same opinion on topics such as abortion, affirmative action and LGBTQ+ rights? Likely most of them. 
So yes, polarization is inevitable when more people get to share their opinions. But the extent to which people are further polarized is exaggerated. We already surround ourselves with people who share the same opinions, so the “echo chamber” touted online is merely an extension of that.
Furthermore, while people can choose not to look into differing viewpoints, social media provides a safe haven for marginalized groups. Social media allows people who are rejected by their communities to find a safe space to express themselves. 
Members of persecuted groups often find solace when discussing aspects of themselves often seen as taboo. Preliminary studies back this finding, showing that LGBTQ+ teenagers actually became happier after the introduction of social media due to finding safe online spaces.
Lastly, on attention. The study on decreasing attention spans was flawed and has been called into question by many other studies, and this argument is nothing new. The “dang kids and their weakening minds due to the evil technology” argument has been around forever. 
Plato, when discussing his worries about written books, quoted his mentor Socrates, who allegedly said “If men learn this (writing), it will implant forgetfulness in their souls; they will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks.” 
Socrates may very well have been correct. However, it doesn’t matter. Even if society has a worse memory than we did centuries ago, our society has adapted to function without more powerful memory capabilities.
Clearly, Socrates’ warning was not enough to halt the progression of technology, which had many positive effects he did not see, even if it “implant(ed) forgetfulness in their souls.” In the same vein, social media is here to stay. 
If we cannot halt its use when people are naysaying with great exaggeration, we will not be able to halt its use ever. It is a useful tool, that like any other tool, can be harmful when used badly and beneficial when utilized properly. So instead of focusing on pushing back against technological developments that have long since become integrated into society, let’s focus on figuring out how to leverage this “addiction” to our advantage.