With the continuation of quarantine and isolation, it’s not uncommon to rely more on social media for news and entertainment. Dr. Roger McIntyre, professor of psychiatry and pharmacology at the University of Toronto, recently conducted a study of Chinese healthcare workers that links increased social media consumption during COVID-19 to a worsened mental health state. He shared further details with WBFO’s Nick Lippa.
WBFO’s Nick Lippa talks about the impact social media can have on mental health with Dr. Roger McIntyre, who is currently a Professor of Psychiatry and Pharmacology at the University of Toronto and Head of the Mood Disorders Psychopharmacology Unit at the University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Nick Lippa: Dr. McIntyre, you recently conducted a study regarding Chinese healthcare workers, showing that the more time people spend on social media the greater the degree of their overall distress and impairment. What did you find?
RM: We have completed a study in China involving over 3000 individuals who are healthcare providers who are frontline workers. And it’s important to clarify, there’s two types of healthcare providers. There’s healthcare providers and then there’s frontline workers, people who work in the healthcare system and are on the frontline. And I think we can agree that the latter group health care providers that are frontline are particularly at risk during this time. And we’re talking normally about risk via the transmission of virus because they’re coming in contact with people who have been infected with Coronavirus. But they are also at risk for a variety of other concerns and we’d like to take a history lessons approach. We learned, for example, during the SARS epidemic, of which Toronto was the city most effective like deaths due to SARS outside of Asia, we had 44 people in Toronto lose their lives because of SARS. And research conducted on the healthcare workers in the frontline at that time indicated that there was a significant increase in depression, anxiety related difficulties, post traumatic stress as well as alcohol related problems. We all are reacting with tremendous concern with the information we were hearing from Europe with respect to the mortality of this virus. And we were especially saddened to hear that frontline workers in some countries like Italy reports us and nurses committing suicide. So I think it really speaks to the stress.
So we said okay, we got to go to China. This is where the virus according to the World Health Organization, began infecting people. And we surveyed over 3000 healthcare frontline workers. What did we find? We found that these workers had staggering levels of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, difficulties related to distress as a consequence of really being in that frontline. And when we dug a little deeper into the data to find out, where there’s certain aspects about these individuals that perhaps increased or decreased their vulnerability, as a group, the overall anxiety, depression and stress level was increased so significantly. What we found when we looked at these later analyses, to determine moderating factors, interestingly we found that consumption of social media seemed to be a factor that increased the overall reporting rates of stress, anxiety and depression. And to be specific, those respondents to our surveys who indicated that they had been on social media for more than three hours a day are two to three times more likely to report depression, anxiety and stress. And I should perhaps contextualize that, prior to COVID-19 and during much of the past decade, there’s a replicated body of scientific literature indicating that social media consumption from people who are using it many hours a day, many days a week are more likely to report negative health outcomes. That is they’re more likely to report decreased well being. They’re more likely to have pessimistic views of themselves in the future. They’re more likely to report themselves as lonely– just as a couple of examples. So there is something about excessive consumption of social media that does not appear to be helpful. It appears to be harmful for you. And we conjecture that is in part because of the contagion, not just of the virus app, but the fear contagion, which only amplifies many social media platforms.
What is the difference between high social media consumption before the pandemic, just in general, and now during the pandemic. A lot of people are not working, they’re just at home. Social media consumption at a high level seems to be a bigger risk.
RM: It’s an excellent point. We all know this is an unprecedented event that’s affected the entire planet.There’s no country spared here. (It’s) unprecedented not only in terms of the impact on trade and the economy and capitalism and etc. But the notion of quarantine, social distancing, socially isolating ourselves. We’ve never seen anything like this. Even going back to the days of the Spanish flu, this level of quarantine globally was not in place at that time. So we as human beings are wired to be social creatures. We’re not wired to be disconnected. And so by the very nature of being socially isolated, physically distanced and in many cases quarantine would stay at home borders and so on, by definition, one would expect an increase in the access of many of these types of platforms. So that’s a reality of this unprecedented time.
The way to approach this however is, like many things in life– and that is that human beings need interpersonal contacts that are substantial, that are meaningful and that are secure. And even at a time like this, where we’re being asked to stay at home and distance ourselves, reaching out, particularly reaching out to people who are anonymous people who are not known to us, people who we don’t have attachments to or have secure relationships with, that does not appear to be particularly therapeutic for a lot of people. And to kind of put a very brief sort of evolutionary context to this– we are in fact, of all this as a species to be interpersonally connected. We are not species that have evolved to be connected to strangers. To be connected to uncertainty within a group environment. In fact, that actually goes against evolution. Evolution has rewarded genetics that promoted attachments to family and to close circles. So there’s a larger question about social media and how in many ways it’s not aligned with how we’ve evolved. But importantly, during times like this during a quarantine, we’re not suggesting people don’t reach out and make connections. What we’re saying is people should reach out and make meaningful connections. So some people have said to me, ‘Well, what if it’s not available?’ Many people don’t have family or don’t have somebody who would identify as an intimate support or an instrumental support. Our attachments can be to other types of entities. For example, many people are attached to their spirituality or to their religion or to their community groups, things of that nature. And so at a time like this, when we’re all feeling fearful, the need has never been greater to have secure and safe attachments. And voluminous consumption of social media does not appear to meet that need.
And that’s really interesting. What I hear from a lot of people is exactly wanting that sense of community. I talk to people who utilize groups like AA, as well as other similar services. What’s a healthy way to manage looking for a community in regards to your social media habits?
RM: I think that there are some very simple and fundamental questions to reflect on whenever an individual is reaching out to another individual or to a group or to an organization or what have you. First of all, does that interaction increase or does it decrease my level of anxiety? It sounds like a very basic question, but that’s an important question. Does engaging with this individual or group, does it actually enhance my well being? My quality of life, my view of myself in my world? Are there aspects about this interaction that’s reducing or increasing my stress? Are there aspects about this interaction that are increasing or decreasing my sense of fear and safety? Now as I go through that, that seems like a fairly basic set of questions. But quite frankly, if you and I were to survey say prior to COVID-19, or even certainly during COVID, people who spent excessive amounts of time hours and again, social media, and they were to fill out surveys regarding those questions on to my point earlier, many people would say, ‘You know, I feel worse after spending time on social media. I feel more depressed. I feel more lonely. My quality of life goes down after social media.’
And then of course, the intuitive question is, well, if it hurts, why do you do it? That’s a rather simple and linear way of considering it because the drive for human attachment is so powerful. And often people will reach out and will engage in unhealthy attachments, rather than having no attachment at all. And that’s us as a species. There’s plenty of examples of how that takes place in day-to-day life for people to continue their relationships, interpersonal or otherwise, that are not in their best interest, because their perception of the alternative is worse. Well, it turns out, in fact, their perception is just their perception. And the reality is that replacing or improving or replacing those types of relationships is always a preferred way to go. But again, that’s where human nature kicks in. And things are much easier said than done.
One of the things I like to bring up is news consumption. One of the big usages of social media is to look for news. What would be your recommendations to somebody who says, ‘Okay, maybe I’m consuming a little bit too much here. What should I do to help myself be mentally prepared to prepare myself a little bit more healthfully now?’
RM: The advice is portion control. Portion control not just with what we eat in terms of food. Portion control with respect to alcohol. Portion control in respect with what we consume through media and social media. And again, that’s the guiding principle for most things in life is portion control. But to add a bit more to it, and to use food as the metaphor, there’s two guiding principles around food consumption– portion control and to make sure that the food choices that you have are healthy. We want both portion control with respect to media and social media, but also to make sure it’s healthy. Now look, a couple things we’ve learned from previous situations of quarantine and epidemics. What we’ve learned is, when people are informed, it significantly reduces their anxiety. It significantly reduces their anger, their frustration and their fear. So we highly encourage people to reach out to respectable media and be informed. It’s good for you to be informed. That’s sort of the fruits and vegetables of your diet so to speak, keeping that metaphor going.
A separate group of investigators in China have reported with the COVID pandemic, that too much general news media consumption can also be toxic after a while. And I’m not surprised to hear that and that also extends into social media. Again, we recognize that for many people, social media is enjoyable. It’s fun. It’s quality of life enhancing and in that all the good things. But for a lot of people, that’s not the case. And if we look across the age bands, it’s a reasonable assumption that the percentage of people over the age of 75 who are using social media is lower than the people under the age of 40. And what’s interesting is people under the age of 40, who are probably using more social media, people of higher age groups, they also tell us over and over and over again that the more they use it the more lonely they feel. So I think like a lot of things in life, it has to be about portion control. And making sure that the consumption of what you’re doing, the choice of the types of social media and general media are appropriate are healthy. But we really strongly encourage people to be informed. And that’s to just not disconnect. The message is portion control.
Bringing this back to your recent study, it was done with frontline health care workers. But this is applicable to everyone, right?
BM: Absolutely. Absolutely. It’s applicable to everybody. And what’s so relevant about studying frontline workers in the healthcare system during this terrible crisis is that we all can agree that that is a very stressful situation for these people. They’re working very long hours, uncomfortable working environments, hyper vigilant, a lot of stress and trauma, seeing a lot of deaths, a fear of infection and transmission to others and at the same time being quarantined. Healthcare workers are often quarantined themselves. So I don’t think anyone is unaware that the frontline staff are really under a lot of stress right now. And that group especially is important for us to study, because people want them to be able to engage in activities and endeavors that are able to not just reduce their anxiety and stress but build their resiliency. And what we’re finding is that overconsumption of social media is not doing well for their resiliency, probably reducing it, and it is enhancing their overall distress, anxiety and depression. And this is a significant problem.
Sutherland House Experts is Empowering Quiet Experts through Compelling Nonfiction in a Changing Ideas Landscape
TORONTO, ON — Almost one year after its launch, Sutherland House Experts is reshaping the publishing industry with its innovative co-publishing model for “quiet experts.” This approach, where expert authors share both costs and profits with the publisher, is bridging the gap between expertise and public discourse. Helping to drive this transformation is Neil Seeman, a renowned author, educator, and entrepreneur.
“The book publishing world is evolving rapidly,” publisher Neil Seeman explains. “There’s a growing hunger for expert voices in public dialogue, but traditional channels often fall short. Sutherland House Experts provides a platform for ‘quiet experts’ to share their knowledge with the broader book-reading audience.”
The company’s roster boasts respected thought leaders whose books are already gaining major traction:
• V. Kumar Murty, a world-renowned mathematician, and past Fields Institute director, just published “The Science of Human Possibilities” under the new press. The book has been declared a 2024 “must-read” by The Next Big Ideas Club and is receiving widespread media attention across North America.
• Eldon Sprickerhoff, co-founder of cybersecurity firm eSentire, is seeing strong pre-orders for his upcoming book, “Committed: Startup Survival Tips and Uncommon Sense for First-Time Tech Founders.”
• Dr. Tony Sanfilippo, a respected cardiologist and professor of medicine at Queen’s University, is generating significant media interest with his forthcoming book, “The Doctors We Need: Imagining a New Path for Physician Recruitment, Training, and Support.”
Seeman, whose recent and acclaimed book, “Accelerated Minds,” explores the entrepreneurial mindset, brings a unique perspective to publishing. His experience as a Senior Fellow at the University of Toronto’s Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, and academic affiliations with The Fields Institute and Massey College, give him deep insight into the challenges faced by people he calls “quiet experts.”
“Our goal is to empower quiet, expert authors to become entrepreneurs of actionable ideas the world needs to hear,” Seeman states. “We are blending scholarly insight with market savvy to create accessible, impactful narratives for a global readership. Quiet experts are people with decades of experience in one or more fields who seek to translate their insights into compelling non-fiction for the world,” says Seeman.
This fall, Seeman is taking his insights to the classroom. He will teach the new course, “The Writer as Entrepreneur,” at the University of Toronto, offering aspiring authors practical tools to navigate the evolving book publishing landscape. To enroll in this new weekly night course starting Tuesday, October 1st, visit: https://learn.utoronto.ca/programs-courses/courses/4121-writer-entrepreneur
“The entrepreneurial ideas industry is changing rapidly,” Seeman notes. “Authors need new skills to thrive in this dynamic environment. My course and our publishing model provide those tools.”
About Neil Seeman: Neil Seeman is co-founder and publisher of Sutherland House Experts, an author, educator, entrepreneur, and mental health advocate. He holds appointments at the University of Toronto, The Fields Institute, and Massey College. His work spans entrepreneurship, public health, and innovative publishing models.
Hallmark launching a streaming service with two new original series, and Bill Skarsgård out for revenge in “Boy Kills World” are some of the new television, films, music and games headed to a device near you.
Also among the streaming offerings worth your time as selected by The Associated Press’ entertainment journalists: Alex Garland’s “Civil War” starring Kirsten Dunst, Natasha Rothwell’s heartfelt comedy for Hulu called “How to Die Alone” and Sylvester Stallone’s second season of “Tulsa King” debuts.
NEW MOVIES TO STREAM SEPT. 9-15
— Alex Garland’s “Civil War” is finally making its debut on MAX on Friday. The film stars Kirsten Dunst as a veteran photojournalist covering a violent war that’s divided America; She reluctantly allows an aspiring photographer, played by Cailee Spaeny, to tag along as she, an editor (Stephen McKinley Henderson) and a reporter (Wagner Moura) make the dangerous journey to Washington, D.C., to interview the president (Nick Offerman), a blustery, rising despot who has given himself a third term, taken to attacking his citizens and shut himself off from the press. In my review, I called it a bellowing and haunting experience; Smart and thought-provoking with great performances. It’s well worth a watch.
— Joey King stars in Netflix’s adaptation of Scott Westerfeld’s “Uglies,” about a future society in which everyone is required to have beautifying cosmetic surgery at age 16. Streaming on Friday, McG directed the film, in which King’s character inadvertently finds herself in the midst of an uprising against the status quo. “Outer Banks” star Chase Stokes plays King’s best friend.
— Bill Skarsgård is out for revenge against the woman (Famke Janssen) who killed his family in “Boy Kills World,” coming to Hulu on Friday. Moritz Mohr directed the ultra-violent film, of which Variety critic Owen Gleiberman wrote: “It’s a depraved vision, yet I got caught up in its kick-ass revenge-horror pizzazz, its disreputable commitment to what it was doing.”
— The year was 2006. Snow Patrol, the Northern Irish-Scottish alternative rock band, released an album, “Eyes Open,” producing the biggest hit of their career: “Chasing Cars.” A lot has happened in the time since — three, soon to be four quality full-length albums, to be exact. On Friday, the band will release “The Forest Is the Path,” their first new album in seven years. Anthemic pop-rock is the name of the game across songs of love and loss, like “All,”“The Beginning” and “This Is the Sound Of Your Voice.”
— For fans of raucous guitar music, Jordan Peele’s 2022 sci-fi thriller, “NOPE,” provided a surprising, if tiny, thrill. One of the leads, Emerald “Em” Haywood portrayed by Keke Palmer, rocks a Jesus Lizard shirt. (Also featured through the film: Rage Against the Machine, Wipers, Mr Bungle, Butthole Surfers and Earth band shirts.) The Austin noise rock band are a less than obvious pick, having been signed to the legendary Touch and Go Records and having stopped releasing new albums in 1998. That changes on Friday the 13th, when “Rack” arrives. And for those curious: The Jesus Lizard’s intensity never went away.
— Hallmark launched a streaming service called Hallmark+ on Tuesday with two new original series, the scripted drama “The Chicken Sisters” and unscripted series “Celebrations with Lacey Chabert.” If you’re a Hallmark holiday movies fan, you know Chabert. She’s starred in more than 30 of their films and many are holiday themed. Off camera, Chabert has a passion for throwing parties and entertaining. In “Celebrations,” deserving people are surprised with a bash in their honor — planned with Chabert’s help. “The Chicken Sisters” stars Schuyler Fisk, Wendie Malick and Lea Thompson in a show about employees at rival chicken restaurants in a small town. The eight-episode series is based on a novel of the same name.
— Natasha Rothwell of “Insecure” and “The White Lotus” fame created and stars in a new heartfelt comedy for Hulu called “How to Die Alone.” She plays Mel, a broke, go-along-to-get-along, single, airport employee who, after a near-death experience, makes the conscious decision to take risks and pursue her dreams. Rothwell has been working on the series for the past eight years and described it to The AP as “the most vulnerable piece of art I’ve ever put into the world.” Like Mel, Rothwell had to learn to bet on herself to make the show she wanted to make. “In the Venn diagram of me and Mel, there’s significant overlap,” said Rothwell. It premieres Friday on Hulu.
— Shailene Woodley, DeWanda Wise and Betty Gilpin star in a new drama for Starz called “Three Women,” about entrepreneur Sloane, homemaker Lina and student Maggie who are each stepping into their power and making life-changing decisions. They’re interviewed by a writer named Gia (Woodley.) The series is based on a 2019 best-selling book of the same name by Lisa Taddeo. “Three Women” premieres Friday on Starz.
— Sylvester Stallone’s second season of “Tulsa King” debuts Sunday on Paramount+. Stallone plays Dwight Manfredi, a mafia boss who was recently released from prison after serving 25 years. He’s sent to Tulsa to set up a new crime syndicate. The series is created by Taylor Sheridan of “Yellowstone” fame.
— One thing about the title of Focus Entertainment’s Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2 — you know exactly what you’re in for. You are Demetrian Titus, a genetically enhanced brute sent into battle against the Tyranids, an insectoid species with an insatiable craving for human flesh. You have a rocket-powered suit of armor and an arsenal of ridiculous weapons like the “Chainsword,” the “Thunderhammer” and the “Melta Rifle,” so what could go wrong? Besides the squishy single-player mode, there are cooperative missions and six-vs.-six free-for-alls. You can suit up now on PlayStation 5, Xbox X/S or PC.
— Likewise, Wild Bastards isn’t exactly the kind of title that’s going to attract fans of, say, Animal Crossing. It’s another sci-fi shooter, but the protagonists are a gang of 13 varmints — aliens and androids included — who are on the run from the law. Each outlaw has a distinctive set of weapons and special powers: Sarge, for example, is a robot with horse genes, while Billy the Squid is … well, you get the idea. Australian studio Blue Manchu developed the 2019 cult hit Void Bastards, and this Wild-West-in-space spinoff has the same snarky humor and vibrant, neon-drenched cartoon look. Saddle up on PlayStation 5, Xbox X/S, Nintendo Switch or PC.
Former President Donald Trump is on the brink of a significant financial decision that could have far-reaching implications for both his personal wealth and the future of his fledgling social media company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). As the lockup period on his shares in TMTG, which owns Truth Social, nears its end, Trump could soon be free to sell his substantial stake in the company. However, the potential payday, which makes up a large portion of his net worth, comes with considerable risks for Trump and his supporters.
Trump’s stake in TMTG comprises nearly 59% of the company, amounting to 114,750,000 shares. As of now, this holding is valued at approximately $2.6 billion. These shares are currently under a lockup agreement, a common feature of initial public offerings (IPOs), designed to prevent company insiders from immediately selling their shares and potentially destabilizing the stock. The lockup, which began after TMTG’s merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), is set to expire on September 25, though it could end earlier if certain conditions are met.
Should Trump decide to sell his shares after the lockup expires, the market could respond in unpredictable ways. The sale of a substantial number of shares by a major stakeholder like Trump could flood the market, potentially driving down the stock price. Daniel Bradley, a finance professor at the University of South Florida, suggests that the market might react negatively to such a large sale, particularly if there aren’t enough buyers to absorb the supply. This could lead to a sharp decline in the stock’s value, impacting both Trump’s personal wealth and the company’s market standing.
Moreover, Trump’s involvement in Truth Social has been a key driver of investor interest. The platform, marketed as a free speech alternative to mainstream social media, has attracted a loyal user base largely due to Trump’s presence. If Trump were to sell his stake, it might signal a lack of confidence in the company, potentially shaking investor confidence and further depressing the stock price.
Trump’s decision is also influenced by his ongoing legal battles, which have already cost him over $100 million in legal fees. Selling his shares could provide a significant financial boost, helping him cover these mounting expenses. However, this move could also have political ramifications, especially as he continues his bid for the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential race.
Trump Media’s success is closely tied to Trump’s political fortunes. The company’s stock has shown volatility in response to developments in the presidential race, with Trump’s chances of winning having a direct impact on the stock’s value. If Trump sells his stake, it could be interpreted as a lack of confidence in his own political future, potentially undermining both his campaign and the company’s prospects.
Truth Social, the flagship product of TMTG, has faced challenges in generating traffic and advertising revenue, especially compared to established social media giants like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook. Despite this, the company’s valuation has remained high, fueled by investor speculation on Trump’s political future. If Trump remains in the race and manages to secure the presidency, the value of his shares could increase. Conversely, any missteps on the campaign trail could have the opposite effect, further destabilizing the stock.
As the lockup period comes to an end, Trump faces a critical decision that could shape the future of both his personal finances and Truth Social. Whether he chooses to hold onto his shares or cash out, the outcome will likely have significant consequences for the company, its investors, and Trump’s political aspirations.
