In Defence of Courts' Privacy Policies
There's common wisdom or common sense that goes something along the lines of, everything you neither need nor use is a distraction, so get rid of it, get is out of the way (or one's field of vision). Much of this applies to social control media, but those things are intentionally built and refined to be as addictive as possible. People "need" their "notifications" as much as they need "nicotine" or "alcohol" or "dopamine-fuelling engagements" in sites such as Facebook or TikTok.
To these companies, "success" is addition and addition is "success".
Moderation? That's a failure. Or only relates to censorship.
Nothing in moderation. Bad for advertisers.
Earlier today BBC Wales published this article about catfishing in social control media. It is an important reminder of the very real harms caused, more so to young people (because their peers have less tact and are less accountable for sordid actions), in social control media.
In courts, at least the ones that I saw, taking photos or videos (or playing as such in social control media) isn't just discouraged; there's a strict ban and there are signs on the walls - including in hallways - to always remind people of that. This is done in order to preserve the dignity of staff and respect the processes.
I personally believe that more places, especially public spaces, need to adopt similar rules (but they do not).
I always saw people violating these rules at the High Court. They can't help themselves, they are addicts.
Envisaged by social control media giants is potential to harm. So when things go wrong it's not a mere accident or unfortunate misuse; it's just a weapon not leveraged as intended.
If you want friends, go offline. Meet real people and share real experiences. █