Mastodawn

Regular reminder that for a fun, accessible, evidence-based perspective on the whole "PHONES IZ BAD!" panic, you should check out my new book

Why Your Parents Are Hung-Up on Your Phone and What To Do About It

amzn.eu/d/01nbDBB

Fiona Bianchi Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy I suspect in many academic spheres there is now little money for doing real research and study therefore highly qualified individuals need to do other jobs to supplement their income, some may stoop to working in call centres or as recruitment consultants, others will dig through the bottom of the proverbial barrel and write for a newspaper, selling their soul for a bunch of hyperbolic headline-grabbing rhetoric

@fionasboots depressingly, I believe that's 100% correct. Not entirely sure what to do about that, but recognising the issue is presumably a step in the right direction

trusty falxter 🧠

Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy
In the late 18th century there was a moral panic in Germany called "Lesesucht" (reading mania): https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesesucht

It was largely the same debate that we have had ever since about the latest media phenomenon. And that's all¹ you need to know about the current smartphone panic.

___
¹ And probably what your article says about it—did not read yet—is also good to know. 🙂

Lesesucht – Wikipedia

Merry Christmas Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy

Channel 4.
UK, if you can find it, absolutely terrifying

'Two part series 'Swiped' tackles the timely issue of the impact of smartphones on children's behaviour. Hosts Matt and Emma Willis joined forces with The Stanway School in Colchester and challenge a group of Year 8 pupils – and themselves – to give up their smartphones completely for 21 days.

11 Dec 2024'

@lyndamerry484 I know of this programme. It's sensationalised unscientific bollocks

Graeme 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy Thanks - good article. Lets do proper science, teach kids how to do that and how to make sense of data to weed out the crap.

webhat Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy as a English speaking child in the Netherlands everyone told me watching too much TV was bad for me, until I started speaking German, from watching so much German kids TV and Open University

Misha Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy

"Personally, I feel that heavily-emotive evidence-free claims should work against your argument when you’re literally arguing for significant government intervention into children’s lives".

However valid your appeal for careful research is, you are missing the point.

Preventing kids from having smart phones is not the "significant intervention in children's lives". The arrival of smart phones is. The burden of proof (of the absence of serious harm) is on the firms selling them.

@MishaVelthuis That is categorically not what the article is saying, though. And while I totally agree that the tech companies should be on the hook for more responsibility/controls/studies, we can't now retroactively insist they do that 20+ years ago.

Misha Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy Retroactively no.

But I thought we were talking about how to (currently) raise kids?

I don't have any kids, but if I would I would totally try my best to protect them against the toxicity of much of the contemporary digital world.

This toxicity is not so much the result of the smartphone itself, but the result of the software/app ecosystem that we have allowed to grow on it.

(I appreciate your push back, btw. I'm just pushing back a bit against the push back).

@MishaVelthuis ah OK

I think we're both in agreement here, but about different points? I feel you took something from my piece that I wasn't intentionally implying? Certainly something to consider in future efforts. I do tend to want to cram as much in as possible, which opens up ample opportunity for suggesting things unwittingly

@MishaVelthuis but yes, I do worry that people may take my stuff as purely binary "phones good/bad", when that's not the case. I certainly do feel the tech companies are given way too much freedom at little to no cost

Ruben Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy The actual challenge is the environment and content the smartphone offers to kids; thousands off ad-ridden, attention-grabbing and manipulative apps (and websites). It's not healthy for us grown-ups, and certainly not for kids.

The debate should be about regulating and limiting commercial forces in kids and young peoples lives, not an outright ban on screens under a certain size.

We have a responsibility to protect kids from being intimately profiled and data-mined from a young age, and hindered tech companies from using this data against them.

This is what is happening today, and is at the root of the problems associated with screen use – not the screen in and of itself.

@Garwboy You're wrong. But enjoy the clicks, I suppose?

@condalmo cast iron watertight argument there. Have a gold star

@Garwboy Right? But you don't actually want an argument, do you? People who post these sort of rebuttal-articles very rarely do. They almost always are just looking to have their opinions validated, and they close off mentally if it's refuted. Toss a couple of brusque, sarcastic pseudo-counterarguments out, then start leveling insults, then disengage. It's counterindicated for your brand/book sales/etc. to actually want to engage and risk looking silly.

I do like a gold star, though

@condalmo my own post took me two+ hours and is 2,500 words long, and explored all the relevant unscientific claims in a major mainstream article. I appreciate and invite evidence-based counterpoints, said as much in it, and have always done so.

Your response was a one line dismissal, containing nothing but snide unfounded condescension toward a total stranger. Your gold star is earned for staggering hypocrisy. Enjoy it.

@Garwboy Come on, man. I could take four+ hours and write a 5,000 word article about how my opinion is that the moon is made of cheese. Would that length make me right? If it's my opinion, can an opinion be wrong, even if it's asinine?

You've written an opinion piece, and your primary opinion, based on the headline, is that her stance is wrong - but then your article is based on the opinion that she's written a bad article. Okay? That doesn't make her wrong, it means you don't like it.

@Garwboy You want to write an article criticizing the mainstream media? Sure, go for it. But it's duplicitous to couch it as a rebuttal of her points, just because it's written as an exploration of an idea for the general public, and not a rigorously "evidence-based" (don't get me started) article in a scientific journal.

@Garwboy Your rebuttals of her "points" are just as anecdotal as her data is, which, fine? But if you're criticizing the article based on that, you're equally guilty.

You're right, there's references anybody could track down that refute or support her hypothesis. Same is true for the effect of sugar on children. In fact, there's strong research disproving the "they misbehave bc of a sugar high" concept.

@Garwboy ... And: parents don't GAF about that. Because when they give their kids too much sugar, what happens?

Are there other factors? Sure. There are other behavioral factors in how adults act when they've had too much to drink. Could make an argument there that "what drinking does to adults' mental health is NOT terrifying." Right? And yet.

@Garwboy Also: I apologize for my starting off with snark. I'm accustomed to good-faith engagement in these sort of interactions usually leading to the realization that the other person doesn't want to have a conversation. I'm not helping to NOT have that happen if I'm being snarky.

SnowBlind2005 Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy

Yeah, if the kids stop using their portable computing devices we'll have to deal with them. No one wants that!

And what kids read books these days? They have 20 somethings online to tell them how to talk back to their parents.

I also wonder if people realize there is a group of people encroaching 60 years of age that have been online since their childhood. Could they offer some insight? No, no, let's ignore that.

Nine Oh Real Jan 4, 2025

@Garwboy This reminds me of https://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/news-events/no-evidence-screen-time-is-negative-for-childrens-cognitive-development-and-well-being-oxford-study/

OII | No evidence screen time is negative for children’s cognitive development and well-being: Oxford Study

In a study of nearly 12,000 children in the United States, no evidence was found to show that screen time impacted their brain function or well-being.

Natasha Jan 5, 2025

@Garwboy It’s an interesting debate which is somewhat polarised. Easy to blame an object “the smartphone” when there are likely to be numerous factors at play. Poverty as likely to play a role in increased anxiety and depression, as families become more under stress themselves. Yes, some teens use of social media is negative, but as you point out, for some it’s a social lifeline and source of support. And smartphone use does not equate to social media per se.

Citoyen européen Ray Hindle ✔️Jan 5, 2025

@Garwboy I seem to remember when I was young, the same sort of thing being said about TV, and we'd all grown up to have square eyes!