On the two-thirds/one-thirds view of Tate, perhaps we should be very worried. Total guess - but my guess is that it’s quite likely that a large proportion of the vulnerable or easily influenced kids are in the one-third and that there’s a bad-actor multiplier effect. In any case I think, without panicking, that it’s reasonable to try to slow down the diffusion of Tate-style content.
I think there's a danger of unforeseen consequences - if you try to ban something, or ask teachers to teach lessons against it, then you risk giving it a glamour and a prominence that it doesn't deserve. A lot of kids are quite countersuggestible (which is great in lots of ways!)
Your article is as usual balanced and nuanced. I was especially interested in the Zoe pronouncement. I know so many people who are obsessed with Zoe and have parted with huge sums of money. No doubt Prof Spector is a fine scientist but ‘fame’ can be addictive and when someone starts having unquestioning followers it becomes a cult and that is troublesome. Anyway enough. Have a lovely weekend and once again thanks for your lovely accessible articles.
Thanks! Yes, it's certainly not a cheap intervention (and a lot of the recommended switches away from UPF seem to involve buying £5 loaves of bread and so on, so may not be realistic for many)
I agree that people know what they like and should be entitled to seek it out. It worked for the smokers of China during the opium wars, so why should it not work for us? It is why I have long campaigned for the legalisation of cocaine and the removal of all age limits on nicotine and alcohol consumption. Freedom!
On the two-thirds/one-thirds view of Tate, perhaps we should be very worried. Total guess - but my guess is that it’s quite likely that a large proportion of the vulnerable or easily influenced kids are in the one-third and that there’s a bad-actor multiplier effect. In any case I think, without panicking, that it’s reasonable to try to slow down the diffusion of Tate-style content.
I think there's a danger of unforeseen consequences - if you try to ban something, or ask teachers to teach lessons against it, then you risk giving it a glamour and a prominence that it doesn't deserve. A lot of kids are quite countersuggestible (which is great in lots of ways!)
Your article is as usual balanced and nuanced. I was especially interested in the Zoe pronouncement. I know so many people who are obsessed with Zoe and have parted with huge sums of money. No doubt Prof Spector is a fine scientist but ‘fame’ can be addictive and when someone starts having unquestioning followers it becomes a cult and that is troublesome. Anyway enough. Have a lovely weekend and once again thanks for your lovely accessible articles.
Thanks! Yes, it's certainly not a cheap intervention (and a lot of the recommended switches away from UPF seem to involve buying £5 loaves of bread and so on, so may not be realistic for many)
There you go again, ruining everything with your damn NUANCE
Sorry, it won't happen again
I agree that people know what they like and should be entitled to seek it out. It worked for the smokers of China during the opium wars, so why should it not work for us? It is why I have long campaigned for the legalisation of cocaine and the removal of all age limits on nicotine and alcohol consumption. Freedom!
Nice motte and bailey dude, good of you to illustrate what I was talking about in the piece