Meta discussed attacking Jonathan Haidt — now even his haters are annoyed

Meta has recently caused controversy among academics from various perspectives on social media and mental health discussions. Three years ago, Meta reportedly contemplated a plan to sway public opinion against one of its leading critics, Jonathan Haidt. However, the proposal gained little traction once it was unveiled in court documents last month. The only thing Haidt and his critics seem to agree on is their animosity towards Meta.

In 2023, court filings revealed that Meta employees had discussed a "Whisper strategy" aimed at turning academics against Haidt. The plan suggested getting Columbia University professor Andrew Gelman, who had previously criticized Haidt, to write a counterargument. Haidt had been advocating for years that social media and smartphones are contributors to the mental health decline among teenagers, as seen in his 2018 book, The Coddling of the American Mind and a congressional testimony in 2022.

Meta's intention to execute their strategy remains unknown, as it's unclear if they ever acted upon the potential plan. Nonetheless, the disclosure has ignited a more intense backlash from both Haidt and his most vocal opponents, many of whom were not named in the court papers. Several academics have stepped forward to claim Meta's involvement in their opposition to Haidt's work.

Candice Odgers, a prominent psychology professor who studies the effects of technology on adolescents and frequently critiqued Haidt's research, asserted that she never received any payment to critique Haidt's book and has always drawn her conclusions based on her own research. Similarly, danah boyd, a communication professor at Cornell University, who has extensively studied teen social media usage, expressed her disdain for Meta's business practices but still supports her research on teens and others who have conducted rigorous analyses of the topic.

Haidt, an influential yet controversial figure, has argued through his bestselling book, The Anxious Generation, and related writing that social media and smartphone access for kids has led to a significant decline in mental health. While some academics, including frequent collaborator Jean Twenge, support his findings, others maintain that available evidence does not substantiate his theory, and the impact of social media on teenagers at the population level is mixed.

Andrew Gelman, a long-time critic of Haidt's methods, denounced Meta's actions, stating that the company's strategy was "gross."

Chris Ferguson, a Stetson University psychology professor, published a meta-analysis of experimental studies on social media's impact on mental health, finding limited evidence of a causal effect. Ferguson, who receives no funding from Meta or any other tech company, accused both Haidt and Meta of being aggressive influences on the understanding of youth mental health. He emphasized that Haidt's viewpoint is not supported by scientific evidence and compared Meta and Haidt as equally detrimental to the field.

Haidt has denied allegations that the researchers mentioned in this article were paid by Meta to critique his work and has not seen any evidence supporting such claims. He has expressed his open-mindedness towards opposing views and civil, rigorous scientific debate, welcoming criticism from these researchers, as he believes it is crucial to view viewpoint diversity in social psychology.