What are the pros and cons of social medias impact on mental health during the coronavirus pandemic?

Potential negative impacts of social media have been increased by the pandemic

Question: What are the pros and cons of social medias impact on mental health during the coronavirus pandemic?
Position‹2 of 2: Cons of social media on mental health during pandemic
Argument1 of 2›: Potential negative impacts of social media have been increased by the pandemic

Before the pandemic, social media could lead to feelings of disconnect and mental health problems such as anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem. With the future global uncertainty and higher engagement rates with social media, these problems have now increased.

The argument

‘The pandemic of social media panic travels faster than the COVID-19 outbreak’. Social media plays an important role in spreading awareness and news about various issues, including the pandemic, but along with that is the spreading of incorrect news, hatred, and racism. Examples of this infodemic include conspiracy theories of coronavirus being caused by 5G, hoarding, panic buying, claims of cures through herbal remedies, and much more. During such a time of uncertainty and unrest, with people staying home and on social media more than ever before, the usual negative effects of social media, such as lowered self-esteem, anxiety, loneliness, and depression, are heightened and more prevalent than ever before, with suicide hotline calls increasing up to 300%.

Premises

[P1]Social media spreads not only awareness but also misinformation, hatred and racism, producing an 'infodemic' of conspiracy theories (such as 5G causing coronavirus), panic buying and false cures during the pandemic. [P2] With people isolated at home and online more than ever, the usual harms of social media — lowered self-esteem, anxiety, loneliness and depression — are heightened, coinciding with suicide-hotline calls rising up to 300%. [C] Because the pandemic has amplified these harms, social media has a negative impact on mental health during the pandemic.

Counter-arguments

Social media allows us to be more connected than ever before, an overarching concern that has always been voiced whenever technology advances is a phenomenon known as social displacement- that time on technology such as social media is "eating away at face-face time." When interacting with friends or loved ones, we tend to use several forms of communication, such as texting, calling, and in-person. Especially in such times where in-person interaction is difficult and unsafe, social media allows people to stay connected with each other. It has become evident this year the importance of human interaction and how social media can never "replace" it. Over a quarter of millennials and teenagers (who have grown up around social media) said that “social media is ‘extremely' or ‘very' important for expressing themselves creatively.” This same group also claims to see racist or hate messages on social media "sometimes." However, the issue of racism, hate, or prejudice is longstanding and existed long before social media.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] That misinformation spread on these platforms is not in doubt, but the premise belongs to a different claim than the title makes: an infodemic is a harm to public understanding and behaviour, while the position concerns mental health, and the argument never connects them. [Rejecting P2] Correlation is doing the work of a cause here. Isolation, illness, bereavement and lost income were all operating at once, and helpline volume measures people seeking help — which can rise because distress rose, because the service was publicised, or because other routes to support had closed. The premise also treats as settled that ordinary use lowers self-esteem and increases depression, where the research finds small and inconsistent effects that depend heavily on how the platforms are used, and it leaves unanswered the counter's point that for many people this was the only contact available.