Overreaction towards children and mobile devices requires restraint

Overreaction towards children and mobile devices requires restraint

Smart-phones aren't utterly ruining children's lives—let's stop the hysteria!

Columnist: Joanna Williams

Date: 21st February 2024

Publication: UK Politics

Lately, smart-phones have been accused of causing kids to succumb to depression, obesity, ignorance, sexual abuse, violence, and criminal acts. Conservative MP Miriam Cates claims that they are doing irreparable damage to children and childhood, connecting these concerns to surging "incidences of anxiety, bullying, self-harm, and suicide." TikTok, a popular Chinese-owned platform, has been specifically targeted for its alleged political indoctrination and brainwashing. Come on, people, let's dial back the hysteria.

Childhood is constantly portrayed as being in crisis, but the alleged cause is always smart-phones. The supposed solution? Ban or heavily restrict their use. For instance, Esther Ghey, mother of a murdered teenager, desires kids to have access to phones without social-media apps and for parents to be notified if their child's online behavior is concerning. Last month, she even warned tech bosses that "more children will die without action." Ian Russell, who lost his daughter to suicide in 2017, advocates for increased censorship of harmful online content.

A new WhatsApp group, Parents United for a Smartphone-Free Childhood, was launched earlier this month with significant media coverage. It appears we've all become convinced that children's lives have been corrupted by smart-phones, with the solution being a smart-phone ban or severe limitations.

However, it's time to reconsider the notion that childhood is being destroyed by smart-phones. This fear ties in with a long line of moral panics about children and the access to new media and technology. Before smart-phones, panic emerged about video games and rap CDs leading to violent behavior, and then television programs. In 1997, one criminologist even argued that popular family shows like Gladiators and Blind Date caused an increase in addiction to real-life violence, sex, and cruelty among children. Long before this, people worried that comic books were detrimental for kids.

In the 1820s, there was a huge concern about children having access to "penny dreadfuls"—cheap horror or gothic books that were popular among children. These stories were denounced as the "literature of rascaldom" and blamed for filling prisons. Around two centuries ago, there was a panic about novels, with people fretting over novel addiction, harm to morals, wasted time, and damage to eyesight and posture.

So, would it shock you to realize that the concept of young people reading novels seems absurd today? Despite concerns shifting through the years, many of the concerns—such as wasting time and harming eyesight—remain unchanged. The apparent harms have evolved over time, though. Decades ago, there was a much greater concern about moral licentiousness, with new media perceived as pushing teenagers into inappropriate relationships. Today, fears center around threats to mental health, eating disorders, and self-harm.

The moral panics, whether concerning smart-phones or penny dreadfuls, say more about adult society's preoccupations than they do about the dangers new technology presents to children. It's worth noting that one of the few famous figures to argue in favor of young people having smart-phones is Esther Rantzen, the creator of Childline. She believes that vulnerable young people need phones to get private help. Even in her defense of phones, she maintains the now prevalent view of childhood as a time of trauma, abuse, and mental health struggles.

Most of today's campaigners blame smart-phones for children's problems. Yet, it's possible that they have things backward. Perhaps children turn to smart-phones to form connections and engage with the outside world, as real-life freedoms have been limited by adults. Back in 2013, before smart-phones were widespread, only 25% of children walked to school alone, compared to 86% in 1971. In a 2021 survey, most children were found to turn 11 before they were permitted to play outside on their own[3]. This trend started with panic about "stranger danger" and escalated with Covid lockdowns that kept children at home and out of school for extended periods.

Simply put, young people have been instructed to stay home, only for adults to freak out when they turn to social media for companionship. Cates complains that "devices are having a detrimental impact on the learning, relationships, and overall health of our children." This criticism unfairly targets technology. In a different scenario, children might be too busy exploring the real world or fully engrossed in learning at school to concern themselves with the notifications on their phones[6].

It's essential that schools keep smart-phones out of the classroom, so children can focus on learning. Yet, a child's phone use should be a matter for families, teachers, and schools—not government ministers or the law[7].

Adults need to get a hold of themselves, halt the smart-phone hysteria, and motivate children to engage with the real world instead.

[1]Rowland, H., Parkinson, A., & Bagot, M. (2016). Social Anxiety, Adverse Parenting, Youth Internet Use, and Cybervictimization: Evidence from an Australian National Study.

[2]Orben, A., & Przybylski, A. K. (2020). Is Social Media Harmful for Children and Adolescents?

[3]Walk, K. (2014). Fewer children walking or cycling to school.

[4]Przybylski, A. K., Weinstein, N., & Murayama, K. (2013). Association between youth-reported problematic smartphone use and interpersonal behaviors: a four-year longitudinal study.

[5]Orben, A., & Przybylski, A. K. (2020). Is Social Media Harmful for Children and Adolescents?

[6]Constable, Eithne. "Smartphone ownership rises, but concerns persist." Pew Research Center. January 12, 2021.

[7]BBC News. "Ofcom says 71% of UK households have smart phones – and 50% own tablets." BBC News. September 11, 2014.

1. Joanna Williams argues that the continuous fear of smart-phones damaging children is part of a long line of moral panics about children and new technology, dating back to the 1820s with penny dreadfuls.
2. In the debate about smart-phones and their impact on children, some argue for a ban or heavy restrictions, while others, like Esther Rantzen, advocate for young people's access to phones as a means for vulnerable children to seek private help.
3. The columnist suggests that the moral panics surrounding smart-phones might say more about adult society's preoccupations than the dangers new technology presents to children.
4. In a culture where children's lives are often perceived as fraught with trauma, abuse, and mental health struggles, Joanna Williams contends that children turn to smart-phones to form connections and engage with the outside world, as real-life freedoms have been limited by adults.
5. As internet usage continues to rise, there are ongoing discussions about the role of technology in education, self-development, identity politics, and culture, with implications for free speech and democracy, fashion-and-beauty, lifestyle, and even areas like cancel culture.

Read also: