> According to Facebook's own annotations of the leaked slides, the finding broadly reported as "30% of teen girls felt Instagram made them feel worse about their bodies" was based on 150 respondents out of a few thousand Instagram users surveyed. They only answered the question about Instagram's role if they had already reported having body image issues. So the finding does not describe a random sampling of teenage girls, or even all the girls in the survey. It's a subset of a subset of a subset.

Can you see how insane this paragraph is? It's like Big Tobacco getting caught with a study that shows that smoking causes cancer. But then they annotate their leaked internal slides saying "well it only cause cancer in 150 out of like thousands of people.. trust us, we annotated the slides." My emphasis is to show how biased the author is -- are we seriously giving credence to the very company that the Wall Street Journal reporting was criticizing? And now we're trusting an employee that has a material stake (stock options, her salary, reputation) in protecting the company? I'm not sold that social media is the "worst thing ever," but NPR really needs to have higher journalistic standards.

> This type of innuendo based commentary is a staple of Fox and conservative media.

It really isn't, and I think this is a really unfair criticism of GP. It's pretty much just being skeptical 101.