Is it possible that we’ve recognized the danger and are beginning to take corrective steps?
Todd Hirsch
27-APR-2026
In 2026, it’s easy to draw a straight line connecting disasters to our collective addiction to social media. Everything from the tragic shootings in Tumbler Ridge to the global crisis of youth mental health seems, at least in part, tied to the algorithms that shape what we see and how we think. In an already uncertain world, social media often amplifies anxiety rather than easing it.
Less tragically—but perhaps more tellingly—we all know how dinner parties, family gatherings, and everyday social moments are quietly eroded by our phones. What was once a tool has become a permanent appendage, inserting a steady stream of distraction, disruption, and low-grade chaos into even our most human interactions.
But are we guilty of “catastrophizing” where this all goes from here? Catastrophizing is a cognitive distortion where someone imagines the worst possible outcome and treats it as likely or inevitable, even when the evidence doesn’t warrant it. And right now, that instinct feels almost baked into the digital economy—an attention marketplace that rewards outrage, fear, and extremes.
Here’s a bold—but unpopular—assertion: We’ve reached peak dysfunction with social media. And things are going to improve, rather than get worse.
Think about some of the major developments we’re witnessing.
- Led by Australia and a handful of European countries, the Canadian province of Manitoba is introducing legislation that will restrict access to social media for minors—an early attempt to navigate the risks these platforms pose to young people.
- Meanwhile, the entertainment industry is increasingly turning a critical lens on technology. Series like Adolescence, a recent British drama that has become a cultural touchpoint around teen social media use, and Black Mirror, are not celebrating innovation—they’re warning us about its consequences.
- And then there’s the growing skepticism toward the tech giants themselves. Figures like Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and Jeff Bezos are no longer widely admired as visionary builders. According to the Pew Research Center, roughly eight-in-ten Americans say these companies have too much power and influence in politics today.1
So—has social media jumped the shark?
Is it possible that, collectively, we are recognizing the danger and beginning to take corrective steps to mitigate the damage?
It’s tempting to default to pessimism and believe things are only going to get worse. But why? Where’s the evidence?
Humans actually have a long track record of course correction. We addressed the hole in the ozone layer. We’ve eradicated diseases. We used to smoke on airplanes! We’ve lifted vast portions of the global population out of extreme poverty. Time and again, when the costs of a system become too high, we adapt.
That doesn’t mean the road ahead will be smooth. The forces driving social media—profit, influence, scale—are deeply embedded in the modern economy, and unwinding their effects won’t happen overnight. There will still be periods of volatility, backlash, and yes, more chaos.
But if history is any guide, we are better at navigating disruption than we give ourselves credit for.
Maybe years from now, we’ll look back on this era of social media excess the way we now view smoking in airplanes or lead in gasoline: a strange, harmful norm that we eventually decided we could live without.
- Pew Research Centre https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2024/04/29/americans-views-of-technology-companies-2/?utm_source=AdaptiveMailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=24-04-29%20Tech%20companies&org=982&lvl=100&ite=13851&lea=3344991&ctr=0&par=1&trk=a0DQm000001hMhRMAU ↩︎
