App blocking vs content hiding
Why blocking an entire platform isn't always the same as removing the distraction.
Imagine you use YouTube for two completely different things:
- One is a two-hour engineering lecture.
- The other is an endless stream of Shorts.
If you block YouTube, you remove both. That is sometimes exactly what someone wants. But sometimes it isn't.
The platform isn't necessarily the behavior
Modern platforms are collections of different experiences.
YouTube contains search, long-form videos, tutorials, music, live streams, and Shorts. Instagram contains messaging, posts, stories, Reels, search, and communities. Treating each platform as one homogeneous behavior can therefore be crude.
Digital wellbeing research increasingly discusses the importance of how, why, and when technology is used rather than treating total usage as a complete measure of digital wellbeing. PubMed Citation ↗
Restriction has a place, but content hiding is more precise
App blocking isn't inherently bad. Sometimes complete separation is exactly what someone needs. The problem is assuming it is the only useful intervention. If the user's problem is specifically short-form recommendations, removing an entire platform can create an unnecessary trade-off.
Content hiding takes a narrower approach. Instead of saying: "Don't use YouTube.", it says: "Use YouTube. Just remove the part you repeatedly fall into unintentionally." That's the philosophy behind Dedoom's approach to Shorts and Reels.
Why this matters for intention
Suppose you open YouTube intending to watch a tutorial. You find the tutorial. You watch it. You leave. That's intentional use.
Now imagine you finish the tutorial, open Shorts, and spend another 40 minutes scrolling. The platform didn't suddenly become "bad." Your mode of use changed. That's the moment Dedoom is interested in.
That's the difference between blocking the internet and shaping the environment around how you use it.