A Fairer Angle for Covering Teenaged Wellnesss Influencers ⇥ nytimes.com

Rina Raphael, New York Times:

But what makes this influencer unusual is her age. She’s only 17, and a high school junior.

Ms. [Ava] Noe, a self-described “crunchy teen,” is just one of a number of young influencers who appeal to other health-conscious kids their age. At times, their anti-establishment viewpoints fall in line with those of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the “Make America Healthy Again” movement, which has expressed skepticism of the scientific community and large food corporations.

The teens’ videos, while at times factually questionable, highlight a desire among some to avoid the chronic illnesses and other conditions that have plagued their elders.

This article keeps rattling around my brain because, I think, this is a subject potentially deserving media coverage but not with this framing. The most appropriate context for these teenagers’ beliefs would undoubtably be seen as pretty brutal — they are not “skeptical”, they are young people who have no idea what they are talking about. Trying to rebut them would seem unkind and I do not think it would be effective.

This article could instead be hung on the dieticians who are concerned about the number of young people getting their health information in this way. Raphael quotes one doctor and one dietician, and they do provide necessary context, but the story is heavily weighted toward the claims these kids are spreading. The Times hired three photographers for this article, entirely for the influencers. They link to the social media accounts for two of them. Perhaps the reason this story is being told from this perspective is because these teenagers are not actually that influential. That is potentially good news. But the Times has now platformed these accounts and is once again guiding readers to information marketed as edgy and anti-establishment, when it is simply bad.

To the extent there is any good information spread by these influencers, it is the kind of stuff you already know. Choose more fruits and vegetables — that kind of thing. Noe may protest that is the advice she is giving; in a response to this Times story, she says “literally all I do is eat whole foods”. It is “common knowledge that fruit is good for you, for the most part, and Skittles are bad for you”. But that is not descriptive of what Noe is doing. She, according to Raphael’s reporting, “use[s] ChatGPT to ask about the benefits of, say, red light therapy, then read the suggested studies”. Whether Noe can actually understand and weigh the credibility of those studies is a good question. But she happens to have a partnership with some red light therapy company.

It seems to me these influencers have succumbed to the same bizarre information space as a bunch of adults, and are selling that back to their peer group. That is an interesting story to me, and I wish it is the one told by the Times. Instead, we get a too-soft profile of some kids who have found online success repeating the things they hear on podcasts, balanced by a few quotes from two professionals. While I have no food or nutrition expertise, I do know what skepticism looks like. I am not sure the Times does.