What about the kids? 鈥═he 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鈥檛 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鈥檛 want to interact with. A 10-year-old doesn鈥檛.
That鈥檚 a problem.
We鈥檙e facing a dual crisis we鈥檙e not talking about. First, we鈥檝e lost our capacity to be bored. Second, we鈥檙e no longer accessing information; we鈥檙e being subjected to it: without filters, without warning and without consent. These twin developments aren鈥檛 separate problems. They鈥檙e concerningly connected.
Remember boredom? Me neither. But as a kid, I鈥檇 stare at the ceiling, play with my dog, or sit with my thoughts until something bubbled up. Now I grab my phone. We鈥檙e all fed a steady stream of content designed to keep us scrolling, each video building on the dopamine hit of the last. It鈥檚 a race to the bottom of our attention span, and we鈥檙e 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 鈥渋nfluencers鈥 whose job is to infiltrate our lives and shape our world view.
It鈥檚 this influence that 鈥淎dolescence鈥 explores, the drama portraying a teenage boy radicalized by Tate-style content. The show鈥檚 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鈥檙e coughed up between cat videos and food hacks.
鈥淎dolescence鈥 left me with more questions than answers. Here鈥檚 one: Whose responsibility is it to protect children from this digital onslaught? Parents? Teachers? Tech companies? And whoever it is, are they doing enough?鈥嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧嬧
I spoke with Everett, both a father and school leader.
鈥淚t鈥檚 down to everyone who cares about this issue,鈥 he said. 鈥淩eality is no one is doing a good job.鈥
Let鈥檚 start at home, where much of the finger pointing is directed. 鈥淚t should begin with parents,鈥 Everett reckoned. 鈥淭hey should monitor their child鈥檚 tech as much as possible.鈥
But the reality? 鈥淒evices 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鈥檛 be seeing, from misinformation to adult content.鈥
As for schools, Everett admits they struggle. 鈥淭he 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.鈥
Which brings us to the digital door of tech companies. Let鈥檚 be real. It鈥檚 about money for them. These corporations designed 鈥渋nfinite scroll鈥 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鈥檚 working. My screen time averages eight hours and 43 minutes. Find out yours before judging.
I鈥檝e watched my attention span shrink to seconds. If something doesn鈥檛 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鈥檛 help myself.
That鈥檚 the trouble. We鈥檙e asking children to navigate a digital world we can鈥檛 handle. When we can鈥檛 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鈥檙e handing kids the keys to platforms designed by behavioral psychologists, then wondering why we鈥檙e raising a generation of junkies.
There鈥檚 hope. Some schools have gone completely phone-free with remarkable results. Katharine Birbalsingh, known as 鈥淏ritain鈥檚 strictest headteacher,鈥 has implemented a total phone ban, contributing to outstanding academic achievement.
Everett thinks this approach shows promise.
鈥淲ith books like 鈥楾he Anxious Generation鈥 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.鈥
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鈥檛 just what our children might see online. It鈥檚 what they鈥檒l miss while they鈥檙e there. The quiet moments of discovery. The creativity born from having nothing to do. The messy relationships that don鈥檛 provide instant validation. The thoughts that only emerge when there鈥檚 space for them. How can kids discover themselves when every moment of consciousness is filled with someone else鈥檚 content, ideas or agenda?
The question isn鈥檛 just what we鈥檙e protecting children from, but who we鈥檙e turning them into, and even sadder, who we鈥檙e keeping them from becoming.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 娌狪CP璇侊細娌狪CP澶05050403鍙-1
- |
- 浜掕仈缃戞柊闂讳俊鎭湇鍔¤鍙瘉锛31120180004
- |
- 缃戠粶瑙嗗惉璁稿彲璇侊細0909346
- |
- 骞挎挱鐢佃鑺傜洰鍒朵綔璁稿彲璇侊細娌瓧绗354鍙
- |
- 澧炲肩數淇′笟鍔＄粡钀ヨ鍙瘉锛氭勃B2-20120012
Copyright 漏 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
