Expert dissent persists on social media harms despite strong evidence.

Evidence

But here is the thing: You can also find experts (academics, people with advanced degrees and university positions) who will argue with you about basically any aspect of all that data—all that research. We talk more, below, about the larger history of scientific controversies, and we situate the current “debate” with respect to a set of earlier moments when the best empirical practices took a very long time to achieve consensus on something TOTALLY OBVIOUS (cigarette smoking and cancer, anyone?). — The Friends of Attention, Attensity!, 110

Categorization

• QUESTION: Worth chasing: which specific credentialed experts dispute the harms research, and do their objections survive scrutiny? Catalyzes the bet-testing of the causality claim.
• XREF: Simultaneously evokes standard science-studies literature on manufactured doubt (Oreskes/Merchants of Doubt) and the smoking-cancer precedent cited here.