Social media addiction can reduce grey matter, shorten attention spans, weaken memory, and distort core cognitive functions, according to recent research:
"Brain rot" was named the Oxford Word of the Year for 2024 after a public vote involving more than 37,000 people. Oxford University Press defines the concept as "the supposed deterioration of a person's mental or intellectual state, especially viewed as the result of over consumption of material (now particularly online content) considered to be trivial or unchallenging."
According to Oxford's language experts, the term reflects growing concerns about "the impact of consuming excessive amounts of low-quality online content, especially on social media." The term increased in usage frequency by 230% between 2023 and 2024.
But brain rot is not just a linguistic quirk. Over the past decade, scientific studies have shown that consuming excessive amounts of junk content — including sensationalist news, conspiracy theories and vacuous entertainment — can profoundly affect our brains. In other words, "rot" may not be that big of an exaggeration when it comes to describing the impact of low-quality online content.
Research from prestigious institutions such as Harvard Medical School, Oxford University, and King's College London — cited by The Guardian — reveals that social media consumption can reduce grey matter, shorten attention spans, weaken memory, and distort core cognitive functions.
[...] The problem, says the researcher, is that social media users are constantly exposed to rapidly changing and variable stimuli — such as Instagram notifications, WhatsApp messages, or news alerts — that have addictive potential. This means users are constantly switching their focus, which undermines their ability to concentrate effectively.
[...] In December, psychologist Carlos Losada offered advice to EL PAÍS on how to avoid falling into the trap of doomscrolling — or, in other words, being consumed by the endless cycle of junk content amplified by algorithms. His recommendations included recognizing the problem, making a conscious effort to disconnect, and engaging in activities that require physical presence, such as meeting friends or playing sports.
"These activities are critical for brain health and overall wellbeing, helping to balance the potentially damaging effects of prolonged screen use," explains Moshel, who stresses that the type of content consumed plays a pivotal role in shaping brain anatomy. "Focus on both the quality and quantity of screen time. Prioritize educational content that avoids addictive features. Set clear, age-appropriate limits on daily screen use and encourage regular breaks."
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Username on Monday January 06, @05:56PM (12 children)
There are people of different levels of intelligence. Maybe the low quality content is intellectually challenging to them. Not everyone reads Grey's anatomy for pleasure.
I find conspiracy theories to be the most pleasing type of thought puzzles. What temperature does steel melt to leave definitive pools of melted steel at the bottom of the wtc? What could have been in the building to burn that hot? Why do they deny it after reporting it, with photographic proof? So insurance would cover it?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by mcgrew on Monday January 06, @06:08PM (1 child)
What could have been in the building to burn that hot?
Jet fuel and wind. And the earth is roughly spherical and we did, in fact, visit the moon. Remember that the printed periodical with the motto "Inquisitive minds want to know" is famous for peddling the bullshit TFA discusses and has been since decades before the internet.
A man legally forbidden from possessing a firearm is in charge of America's nuclear arsenal. Have a nice day.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Wednesday January 08, @01:58AM
If one scaled the Earth to the dimension of a ball bearing, do we have the ability to make a ball bearing of that spherical precision?
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by aafcac on Monday January 06, @06:29PM (2 children)
The big difference tends to be in the language and detail that's used. But, there is a point where so many of the details have been left out or simplified that it's no longer teaching anything useful. A good scientific educator can limit the amount that is lost due to bringing the material down to a level that the people reading it can understand. And, recognizes when something is legitimately too complicated for that audience.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 06, @08:26PM (1 child)
See also Good Guys and Bad guys.
(Score: 2) by aafcac on Monday January 06, @10:18PM
Right, and there's deliberately misleading or wrong information put out as well.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by richtopia on Monday January 06, @07:13PM (1 child)
I suspect it is less the content itself but the volume. You get on almost any social media platform and this brain-rot content will get algorithmically shoveled at you. The addictive nature of the content keeps people's attention. Even if you are interested in something new, the learning process requires some digestion - practice problems, discussion, or even just contemplation. So spending 4 hours watching "educational" brain rot content generates little actual learning meanwhile adjusting your brain's expectations to immediate entertainment.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by HiThere on Monday January 06, @09:04PM
The summary indicated that a big factor was the rate of change. I can see this as sort of like riding a roller coaster...quite exciting, but getting excited that way every day isn't a good thing.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 06, @09:25PM (3 children)
I wonder which type of content is more damaging in Brain Rot: high bandwidth more natural to the senses video input, or low bandwidth text data which we have only adapted to interface with in the past 500 generations or less?
Of course: the value of cat videos cannot be under-estimated.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Samantha Wright on Monday January 06, @09:54PM (2 children)
Well, it might help to understand that the media establishment misapprehended the term on purpose. The original meaning of "brain rot," as actually used by the people who voted for it, is entirely about noticing one's own fixation on in-jokes and memes—if you reflexively try to relate every conversation back to a certain fandom or piece of humour, then that certain thing is said (jocularly) to have rotted your brain; likewise, if two or more people think of the same punchline in response to some event or stimulus, then they are "sharing a single brain cell."
After it was voted Word of the Year, a small cohort of experts in the social sciences were summoned by various mainstream journalists to explain what "brain rot" meant, and they arrived at a loose consensus centred around the themes in the above article, which really has nothing to do with the neologism as commonly used by the young and hip; it is entirely a projection of the experts' own anxieties about the same constant decline of human culture that has galvanized and terrorized elites ever since Hesiod failed to outshine Homer.
There is no real story here, no real inciting incident from which a fully-formed media circus might spring; rather we have the news equivalent of a stand-alone complex, where compulsive imitation is the only linking factor causing a feeble echo of a zeitgeist that was presumed to exist.
In other words, this story itself is an example of genuine brain rot.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 06, @10:42PM (1 child)
Thanks, and I agree, though I must admit: when I was working in food service, scrubbing potatoes one day and cooking those same potatoes the next day, I became rather concerned about my brain filling up with potato shapes when I started recognizing them on cooking day from when I scrubbed them the day before.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Samantha Wright on Tuesday January 07, @12:13AM
That is called the Tetris effect [wikipedia.org]. It is part of the learning process and will happen whenever you pick up a new, specialized skill that consumes all your time.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Tuesday January 07, @09:03AM
The magic Google term to more info is "popcorn brain". There's been quite a bit of work done in this area.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 06, @06:48PM (1 child)
...Do you even lift?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by quietus on Monday January 06, @09:17PM
Lift weights, you mean? Like Nassim Nicholas Taleb?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by VLM on Monday January 06, @10:33PM
I'm sure it'll be strongly pushed that this is "new" as a component of that evil social media and internet.
Luckily legacy media, like formulaic Hollywood movies, bubblegum pop music, entertainment magazines, and daytime TV drama would never be like that, LOL. People should totally abandon that brain rotting internet and go back to watching really high brow stuff like Maury and General Hospital and People magazine.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 07, @01:14PM (1 child)
(Score: 4, Informative) by kazzie on Tuesday January 07, @01:53PM
Two hundred social media streams, and nothing good to watch!
(Score: 2) by jman on Tuesday January 07, @02:12PM
I was having a hard time following this article, so I asked Gemini to find a Facebook page that could explain it.
(Score: 1) by vistic on Tuesday January 07, @09:03PM (1 child)
I was concerned about this when Jerry Springer type talk shows became popular.
Then I was concerned about this when reality shows like the Kardashians became popular.
Consuming garbage content for SURE rots people's minds and lowers the quality of their thoughts. But garbage content attracts a certain type of mind. If you have discerning taste then the garbage is always just garbage and its always there. You're not consuming it but you can't aboid it and you can't avoid other people who have been degraded by it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 08, @02:04AM
Remember the 50's TV and the boxing matches?
People would buy a TV to watch that???