Screens & Children: What Should You Really Worry About?
Do you think there’s a devil living in your phone?
You might, if you read Nellie Bowles recent New York times trifecta describing how parents are struggling with how they use technology with their children. https://nyti.ms/2JkjOdJ
Indeed there is a lot to fear when you give a young child free reign to — among other things — a million channel pocket TV called YouTube. But good decisions are rarely made when motivated by fear.
New parents come to worrying naturally; pre-programmed to associate “new” with “danger.” So it’s not surprising we worry that “the devil” in new technologies that will deliver “blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons” along with ads that are “screaming, cajoling, and offending.” That was how TV was described 1961 by FCC chair Newton Minow. He called it a “a vast wasteland.” (Listen to his speech, at http://bitly.com/2Qa3heR)
There’s no shortage of “wasteland” in social media, YouTube and in the app stores. But removing screens from a modern home is hardly realistic. Besides, any parent knows — the fastest way to draw attention to something is to make it forbidden. So what do you do?
THINK ABOUT IT FOR MORE THAN A SECOND — WHAT EXACTLY IS A “SCREEN?”
It’s a rookie’s mistake to put lump all screens into one bucket and then start drawing a single, broad conclusion. I was so disappointed that the NYTimes let a writer go down this path. From a researcher point of view, the topic of children and technology is one that is foggy; loaded with what researchers call confounding variables. The modern smart phone is a chameleon-like device that takes the form of the app it is running.
To understand what it is, you have to understand that particular app, and there are millions. You also need to know the context in which the app is being used. A child’s age, gender, family income is just the tip of the research question iceberg.
To cut to the chase, some screen content is wonderful; some is rotten. That means some screens are good and some are bad.
But the premise that screens should be removed from the life of a modern child is absolutely silly.
Should flashlights, maps, timers, cameras and “how to build a treehouse” videos be off limits before age 13? A tablet of phone is all of these. And what about game consoles? One of my TCNJ college students shared a wonderful story about the richness of time spent with his father playing the co-op game LEGO Star Wars together.
Steve Jobs was an expert on motherboards. Not mothering.
DON’T GET YOUR CHILD DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION FROM PEOPLE WHO DON’T KNOW ABOUT CHILD DEVELOPMENT
Another rookie’s mistake is to turn to tech creators for tech answers when children are involved.
Nellie Bowles picked at the “Steve Jobs wouldn’t let his own children kids have iPads” scab once again. Jobs was good with motherboards, not mothering. In other words, he was a gifted technologist, but is he was also known for his rough interpersonal encounters with both family and colleagues (Isaacson documents this well). He’d be low on my list for advice on human development.
Likewise the medical doctors and child psychiatrists Bowles used as experts are also quick to chime in on the screens and children issue, but they are in professions that specialize in what to do when things that go wrong. A profession that sees children with problems generates anecdotes about children with problems. Researchers point out this as a classic sampling error because it distorts reality. But Bowles went for it, and the New York Times featured it.
THE REAL WORRIES: THE GROWING CULTURE OF MANIPULATION
My reviews with popular apps in iTunes and Google Play has alerted me to the growing culture of manipulation that surrounds children when they use mobile devices. This is the real “devil” in the phone.
I call it what it is … evil.
You should not trick an innocent child for your own financial gain. App stores run by large corporations actively promote and profit from experiences specifically designed to tempt children with “free” puppies or kittens cleverly mixed with something to buy.
It was no surprise to me to see the study “Advertising in Young Children’s Apps: A Content Analysis” found that nearly 100 of the most downloaded free and paid apps in the children’s category in Google Play contained commercial characters, pop-up ads, unlock play items, or hidden symbols such as the $ camouflaged as gameplay items. http://bitly.com/2QeN34b. I challenge you to download some of these apps yourself.
You’ll get mad.
WANT ANSWERS? USE CHILD DEVELOPMENT THEORY
The field of child development can give you a mental toolset that can help you better understand how children react to new things. Thanks to the work of Piaget, Skinner, Froebel others, we already know a lot about how children grow, learn and unfold into adults. Their observations help us identify how children can benefit from well-chosen materials — both analog and digital.
This knowledge will help you relax, as you learn to view apps, games and toys as merely another type of material. Sure social media can hijack an older child’s life, but it can also foster rich new interactions, and give a child a new type of voice, not to mention a new way to hone a communication skill.
Chip Donohue, an early childhood educator who has followed the research closely likes to say — “it’s not about screen time, it’s about time.”
You can prevent child drownings by building walls around pools, or you can teach a child to swim. One parenting approach puts precious energy into restrictions; the other into empowerment.
Seasoned parents know that the best way to spark a child’s interest in something is to put a ban it. So help a child learn self-regulation, with your eyes wide open.
It’s not a matter of if your child will encounter bad content online — it’s a matter of when. And you want to be both aware and around, to help them deal with it. It’s quite fashionable these days to create strict “no technology zones” for example. But I don’t think it’s that simple. One family used the devices to foster relationships, by playing trivia games and making funny photos of a big sister. http://www.fredrogerscenter.org/2018/07/dining-kids-screens/.
Many common concerns and controversies view were defined long ago in the now-six-year old document that addresses technology use with young children, at http://www.naeyc.org/content/technology-and-young-children.
If you don’t have time for the read, you can boil it down to three words — access, balance, and support, or ABS. http://www.fredrogerscenter.org/2013/05/three-words-for-digital-age-parents-access-balance-and-support/
ACCESS, BALANCE, SUPPORT OR A.B.S. — GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR HEALTY MEDIA USE
I don’t believe in criticizing another writer’s hard work without offering an alternative view, and a list of products that pass the ethics test. So here’s my advice to parents about how to use technology with their children. I’ve tested with my own children, and — while it’s not an exact recipe — it’s the best I can offer.
A is for access to quality media. There’s only one way to learn how technology works — to get your hands on it. That means playing, fiddling and sometimes testing the limits of smart speakers, laptops, flying drones, touch screen tablets. Actively seek quality apps (here’s three that I think Fred Rogers would like) http://www.fredrogerscenter.org/2018/10/three-childrens-apps-fred-rogers-might-appreciate/ The good news is that there is plenty more. You just need to learn to recognize ‘em.
B is for balance. Just as a healthy diet consists of a variety of foods, a child needs just the right mix of concrete and abstract, real and pretend. Camping, taking care of a gerbil or practicing the clarinet can help offset abstract screen time. There’s an art to knowing when to set a limit, or when to play along.
S is for support. Left on their own with YouTube, a child will gorge themselves. They need old fashioned supervision and role models to set limits and demonstrate how to use technology to enhance and empower (rather than distract and waste time). You can prevent child deaths due to drowning by building walls around pools, or you can teach a child to swim. One parenting approach puts precious energy into restrictions; the other into empowerment and freedom. This helps the development of self-regulation, but do so with your eyes open. It’s quite fashionable these days to create strict “no technology zones” for example, but that might not be necessary. I watched a family of four who used their devices to foster the interactions between the family members, using a trivia app and photo filters. http://www.fredrogerscenter.org/2018/07/dining-kids-screens/.
It is thrilling work to start a family.
Today’s parents have tools that the previous generation could have only dreamed about, including a search engine with an endless supply of mentors.
But it’s still tough work, any why you slice it. There’s no exact recipe for using, or not using technology. All you can do is to create the conditions that increase your chances of success.
— — — — — — — — — — -
Want some ethical children’s digital products? Here are 1646 in the CTREX database, sorted with most recent, first → http://bit.ly/2xx0GED
This article, by Warren Buckleitner, appeared in the November issue of CTR. A shortened version appeared in the New York Times Well Newsletter https://nyti.ms/2qw1shv
