Two huge media companies, Meta (Instagram) and Google (YouTube), were found guilty last month of intentionally designing their products to addict young people.
Among those addicting features, reportedly, are the ability to scroll endlessly, aka infinite scroll, algorithms that deliver curated content, short video clips, and push notifications. You know, all the stuff you encounter when you’re online.
Impose age limits, you say? I’ve wondered myself how websites can prove or disprove the age I give them. I think it’s a very imperfect safeguard that anyone halfway determined can probably get around.
The guilty verdict was wrong. Why? Because those features weren’t and aren’t designed specifically to attract and addict kids. They are common features in most social media and many, many websites online. They are features intended to attract any and all ages, everybody and anybody who will pay attention, stay on the site, see the ads, return to the site again and again. It just happens that young people are more attracted by and vulnerable to those features, and generally have more time to spend online.
In my opinion the fault lies instead with those parents and guardians who allow their young kids to have phones and computers — if not actually provide them — and then not monitor their use.
The kids stay online for many hours a day? Where are the parents during those many hours? Why were impressionable, immature youngsters given unlimited, unsupervised access in the first place?
That’s all. Just wanted to say that. I don’t blame the companies for trying to attract and keep audiences for their products and services, particularly when their audience is the product. That’s their business, their corporate raison d’être.
Not surprisingly, Meta and Google have said they will appeal. (Google certainly should because YouTube is not a social media platform.)
(To be clear, I think social media is doing a lot of damage in our society and I wish it didn’t exist at all. But its features are not designed specifically to addict kids.)
[Correction: The word not was inadvertently dropped from the last sentence above. It now reads correctly.]
You talk nothing but logic, Colorado.
What’s needed, in the absence of the parental oversight, is phone control to limit the time spent – to be programmed including no. of hours between sessions.
But it would be, were it possible in these times of entitled kids, infinitely preferable that they not be given phone until responsible.
Parents are the grown-ups who should know when their kids are emotionally mature enough and responsible enough to deal with the hazards of social media. They should stay aware of how those devices are being used. Limit time online. If necessary, limit the time wifi is available in the home. Or simply confiscate the devices for x hours a day. Parents have always been the first line of defense for their kids. Technology has not changed that.
I’m with you on this
I never doubted it.
Me, too, but then, I grew up with a phone attached to the wall. One of our grandsons received a phone at the age of nine. Personally, I don’t think he was ready for it, yet there are kids younger than that who receive phones. They’re not ready for the responsibility or have the control to use the phone for what it was intended, but parents need to learn to say, “NO.”
The phone I grew up with was shared with four siblings. We plugged it into a jack in the front coat closet. Instant phone booth. But you’d better believe my parents monitored our time on it.
Parents today need to remember that a smartphone can access to the entire internet, not just schoolmates. And there are places on the internet that even adults should avoid.
This is a tough problem. I have 3 grandchildren who have grown up near me, the youngest of whom is now 15. Smart phones are like an appendage to them, a fifth limb if you will. Communication on these devices is almost continuous. How would a parent go about monitoring and supervising this activity? In my experience, it’s hard enough to get an answer to, “how was school today?”, other than “fine”, much less “what subjects are you and your pals talking about online lately?”
Yes, smartphones are like appendages. But kids aren’t born with them. Phones are provided by parents. And parents are or should be fully aware of when their kids are emotionally mature enough and responsible enough to deal with what internet access brings with it. Those phones and computers are not just a way to talk to pal Joey three blocks away, not just a way to get a few tips on tomorrow’s homework. They are infinitely more than that, up to and including child predators on the other end of the line. I expect parents today to be just as responsible and proactive as they’ve always been and to find ways to protect their children. The dangers are different now, but still very real.
I am very late to the party on this message but cannot resist conributing to the conversation. I am friends with a young woman who holds the distinction of being the first child to be groomed online. A 30ish man pretending to be 14 years old began to groom her when she was 13. She used the family computer in her parents’ home. The man taught her how to remove all traces of their conversations, so even though her parents were very attentive to her activities, this all went unseen by the adults. It came to a crescendo on NYE when he drove from Maryland to western Pennsylvania, convincing her to “come outside for just a minute to meet in person”. She told me that the instant the car door closed, she knew she was in trouble. He took her to Maryland and did unspeakable things. Luckily, Pennsylvania had an outstanding FBI team who located her and broken in to his home while he was at work. The young woman has spent her life speaking out about this, yet somehow parents don’t seem to get it. Final note: he has now completed his prison sentence and upon release, chose to move from his home in Maryland to her hometown in PA.
Nina
There’s no time limit on this subject, and this story is horrifying! Sure, there’s a lot of woulda, coulda, shoulda here … like maybe the parents simply locking their computer when they weren’t around, but that, of course, is hindsight. Absolutely chilling that he moved to her hometown after getting out of prison. An immediate restraining order, of course. As if a mere piece of paper poses a physical barrier to anyone determined to ignore it. As if rearresting him after another assault would be any sort of justice for the victim. I can only think of changing names and moving to another city — while he’s free to move about at will. Nightmarish story.
johnthecook…You get a BIG hardy AMEN and AMEN for this post. PARENTS are the real cause of the downward trend in today’s social media craze. Children may close their ears to advice, but their eyes are ALWAYS open for an example! Prepare your child for the road and NOT the road for your child! Don’t correct your child for your convenience, correct them for character development!
Thanks, John. So true. I especially like, “Prepare your child for the road and NOT the road for your child.” That’s the most important thing parents can do.