What about the kids? The digital dilemma raising junkies
Print Edition
This week and without warning, a horrid video popped up on my phone. A puppy had its mouth and paws bound with tape, and was hanging in a plastic bag by the motorway. I immediately flicked past, but the image stayed with me. This was something I didn’t want to see, yet there it was at 11am on a Tuesday.
At 39 years old, I have the knowingness to scroll, ignore or block things and people I don’t want to interact with. A 10-year-old doesn’t.
That’s a problem.
We’re facing a dual crisis we’re not talking about. First, we’ve lost our capacity to be bored. Second, we’re no longer accessing information; we’re being subjected to it: without filters, without warning and without consent. These twin developments aren’t separate problems. They’re concerningly connected.
Remember boredom? Me neither. But as a kid, I’d stare at the ceiling, play with my dog, or sit with my thoughts until something bubbled up. Now I grab my phone. We’re all fed a steady stream of content designed to keep us scrolling, each video building on the dopamine hit of the last. It’s a race to the bottom of our attention span, and we’re losing.
Years ago, Andrew Tate would likely have remained the nobody he ought to be. But our reliance on technology to escape boredom has given rise to “influencers” whose job is to infiltrate our lives and shape our world view.
It’s this influence that “Adolescence” explores, the drama portraying a teenage boy radicalized by Tate-style content. The show’s unflinching portrayal is a wake-up call so compelling that it was discussed in UK Parliament. Unfettered online access is now a national security concern. Before social media, fringe ideologies remained fringe because accessing them required effort. Today they’re coughed up between cat videos and food hacks.
“Adolescence” left me with more questions than answers. Here’s one: Whose responsibility is it to protect children from this digital onslaught? Parents? Teachers? Tech companies? And whoever it is, are they doing enough?
I spoke with Everett, both a father and school leader.
“It’s down to everyone who cares about this issue,” he said. “Reality is no one is doing a good job.”
Let’s start at home, where much of the finger pointing is directed. “It should begin with parents,” Everett reckoned. “They should monitor their child’s tech as much as possible.”
But the reality? “Devices are great babysitters. Parents hand off the tablet, and kids entertain themselves. The tap and play leads to finding all kinds of things children shouldn’t be seeing, from misinformation to adult content.”
As for schools, Everett admits they struggle. “The firewalls are okay, but students teach each other how to skirt them. Teachers call kids out, but eventually, they give up. Rarely is good tech use taught.”
Which brings us to the digital door of tech companies. Let’s be real. It’s about money for them. These corporations designed “infinite scroll” features and notifications for a reason. Their business model depends on addiction, not protection. They want you to buy their product and stay stuck to it. And it’s working. My screen time averages eight hours and 43 minutes. Find out yours before judging.
I’ve watched my attention span shrink to seconds. If something doesn’t grab me, I scroll. I check my phone first thing in the morning and last thing at night. I reach for it in moments of discomfort, or even in conversation. I can’t help myself.
That’s the trouble. We’re asking children to navigate a digital world we can’t handle. When we can’t put our devices down, how do we convince kids they should? When algorithms outpace our understanding, how do we teach children to recognize manipulation? We’re handing kids the keys to platforms designed by behavioral psychologists, then wondering why we’re raising a generation of junkies.
There’s hope. Some schools have gone completely phone-free with remarkable results. Katharine Birbalsingh, known as “Britain’s strictest headteacher,” has implemented a total phone ban, contributing to outstanding academic achievement.
Everett thinks this approach shows promise.
“With books like ‘The Anxious Generation’ and other research, parents are waking up to the damage done by devices to children. But it will take serious commitment by all groups to make a difference.”
Agreed. The answer demands action from all sides: parents setting boundaries, schools teaching media literacy, tech companies designing child-safe platforms rather than attention traps, and government regulation with teeth.
The greatest fear isn’t just what our children might see online. It’s what they’ll miss while they’re there. The quiet moments of discovery. The creativity born from having nothing to do. The messy relationships that don’t provide instant validation. The thoughts that only emerge when there’s space for them. How can kids discover themselves when every moment of consciousness is filled with someone else’s content, ideas or agenda?
The question isn’t just what we’re protecting children from, but who we’re turning them into, and even sadder, who we’re keeping them from becoming.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
