143

How Teens and Parents Approach Screen Time: Most teens sometimes feel happy and peaceful when they don’t have their phone, but 44% say this makes them anxious. (www.pewresearch.org)

submitted 3 months ago by boem@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 42 points 3 months ago

Well yeah. If I was blocked off from communication with everyone, of course I would be anxious. There's a difference between the security in having your phone on you, and using it all the time.

[-] MasterHound@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

There has to be a happy medium between not isolating your kids while also protecting them from what is a highly corrupting environment. Maybe this is just hindsight, but I look back at my unfiltered internet access as a kid and am pretty pissed off that my parents didn't get more involved.

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 months ago

Tbh I had good filtered access as a kid but was rabid for more and private internet access, so kinda went off the deep end when I got a phone. I'm not sure what my parents could have done

[-] owen@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 months ago

Same here. When I got my first smartphone in highschool, I quickly became massively addicted. I would guess that at least half my time was spent on reddit and 4chan for many, many years.

Though I don't blame my parents... How could they have known?

[+] Sorgan71@lemmy.world -11 points 3 months ago

Its communication that harms young brains. Kids should never have unrestricted access to the internet.

[-] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 10 points 3 months ago

That sounds like censorship to me (and thus, a bad thing). Maybe it's just because I come from a background where my ultra religious parents censored the entire secular world from me as a child, but I am firmly against any form of censorship.

[-] meat_popsicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

Goatse, tubgirl, meatspin, or the BME pain olympics are not exactly hallmarks of quality communication and restricting that type of content is valid for minors. It’s not censorship to try to avoid desensitizing kids too early. Sometimes, people need experience before they can see the horrors.

[-] bassomitron@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I think they were referring to basic information censorship versus letting 10-year-olds/whatever aged minor have unfettered access to the entirety of the internet.

[-] meat_popsicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

Here are the lines from the guy I replied to:

That sounds like censorship to me (and thus, a bad thing)

And…

but I am firmly against any form of censorship.

Allowing any censorship would be a bad thing, according to that poster, so I provided a reason why some censorship may be desired.

Your argument is not on censorship yes or no, but on how far. That’s a different discussion.

[-] bassomitron@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

True, guess I interpreted it less literally. Who knows for certain besides OP, I suppose.

[-] Sorgan71@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

kids need to have things restricted from them. If a parent believes something is harmful to their kid, then they need to restrict it from them.

[-] ashley@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 months ago

not really. kids need communication, as well as adults: since humans are such social animals. what harms young people more is stuff that decreases attention span, unrealistic body expectations, etc not "communication"

[-] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 32 points 3 months ago

So that thing with all my financial info, that accesses all the places I present myself publicly (ie social media), that is the primary method of people contacting me, that might be my best means of procuring transportation/food/emergency services, that helps me know where to go, that is my calculator/rolodex/calendar, that has all my prescription alarms, etc., that thing? Why would I miss it?

[-] bratosch@lemm.ee 10 points 3 months ago

Well , it doesn't explicitly specify in the article what they mean by "don't have their phone", but from context I understand it as "not using it", or having it put away but still within reach.

The article also seem very directed at social media. All the things you mentioned, except social media, are on a 'need' basis (transportation, bank access, etc) which really doesn't take an abundance of screen time.

[-] bassomitron@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Well there's also school, work, messaging friends/family to coordinate events or daily errands/child caretaking/etc or just simply keeping in touch/chatting, reading for news/pleasure, tracking emergency events like inclement weather or other disasters, etc. etc. So there's plenty of screen time still even when you subtract social media usage, at least for many older kids/young adults, and/or adults.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

where's my dopamine pump? WHERE'S MY DOPAMINE PUMP?!?!

Oh god oh god o shit wtf goddamnit

OH! There it is. whew heh. ahhhh. memes. funny.

[-] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago

"Screen time"

[-] ULS@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago

Withdrawals. Bring back pagers.

[-] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

Dennis Duffy?

[-] ULS@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago

More like Hilary Duff.

this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024

143 points (96.1% liked)

Technology

55647 readers

2569 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS