So I tend to agree with this, but some of the sources seem...not to be the greatest?
The first link just goes to a blog post that cites "the current statistics", and "4–7 minutes" doesn't actually seem to be based on current rigorous studies (unless someone knows of an actual source?).
The point that students are "struggling to remember almost anything" leads to a page that, as far as I can tell, doesn't say anything of the sort.
The assertion that kids "don’t know multiplication tables" comes from a study done in India – of course, math skills in India (and anywhere) are important, but we don't know what the situation was there previously; the article only mentions that there was a (slight) dip in overall math scores since 2017. I taught in a developing country pre-smartphones and most of the kids there didn't know their times tables, so this may be about educational inequality rather than technology.
Other links go to Reddit and even TikTok...it's always been easy to find anecdotal evidence that "kids today" are so much worse than they used to be.
Some of the other links are more difficult for me to quickly assess, but it's not clear that they all come from unbiased sources or large-scale studies.
I write this as a supporter and someone who is personally convinced that the overuse of technology has been a disaster for childhood (and adulthood). And I've only heard good things about The Honest Broker. I just think we have to be careful to build our arguments on the firmest foundation possible.
I agree wholeheartedly with these comments that the evidence needs to be better.
I recall some headlines in British media quoting some teachers who said their kindergarten students couldn’t hold a pencil or go to the bathroom by themselves.
Agreed. #3 is definitely not a “fact.” The article leads to a scare mongering quote from a guy who then tries to get people to buy his new book. Where’s the actual research?
We know autism is largely genetic, and autism causes children to be more interested in things and less interested in people. Recent research concluded the relationship between autism and early screentime was likely NOT causal - it's that autism causes the preoccupation with screens rather than screens causing children to be autistic.
For the really worst ones like not remembering their own name I definitely would demand stronger evidence. (The one I do believe is not being able to read a traditional clock. But when have they ever seen one? Sometimes traditional technologies do become left behind. Remember when Sam Cooke lamented that he didn't know what a slide rule was for? Now nobody does.)
This needs to be shared far and wide, read by every parent and policy maker. This is exactly what us teachers have been seeing and saying. But nobody listens to teachers. Thank you.
I tried to follow the links back to the statements about children's inability to use a knife or have difficulties with using the bathroom. All links were paywalled, but after some sleuthing, it turns out the source appears to be a blog, Netmoms, which doesn't link to any data. I think Ted Gioia and Johnathan Haidt are intelligent, thoughtful writers. But this is sloppy work that misinforms and has no place in their work. Shameful, I expect more.
As a teacher, I think it’s imperative that we mobilize our schools toward a solution. Schools are one of the few remaining places where we can protect and provide the developmental conditions that kids actually need to thrive. They ought to be sanctuaries — havens of embodied connection. I wholeheartedly believe this is possible:
Totally agree that the focus should be thriving. Are you suggesting a complete restructuring of the school? I truly mean from the bottom up?
The most obvious issue that showcase this: There is no place to rest in a school. Stress is the number one killer in the world, yet we give no place for kids to rest or relax in the most important place of their development. Rest, ironically, makes you better.
And if one think that is normal. Well, sorry to say, but you worldview is one of the problems that you should re-examine. The way we live is not normal. At all. It is time we really start questioning the most abnormalized things in our society.
As I think social media is bad, but we also know that humans who suffer want to be distracted. Sometimes removing a coping mechanism can actually hurt a person more if you do not fix the cause. In this case, that can be also focusing on improving and making it easier to make friends. As we see with the healthy "no drinking or smoking". Alcohol and smoking was actually really important ways for humans to regulate their emotions from a super stressful society. When we removed that easy way of adjusting, it meant that we actually got more stressed but a healthier. Alcohol served as the oil to reduce social fear.
This is just one absurd example of how we structured modern society without even questioning it anymore. We need to get to the cause of things.
If you look at school objectively, it is a place that is have more resemblance with a prison than an a healthy place to be in. This post from Psychology today lays it out how we completely mismatched school with our ancestral origin:
If we keep pushing people into systems that are highly dysfunctional it will keep producing dysfunctional individuals. And now is the time for a complete re-haul as AI is changing everything.
There's a lot here - too much to address in the comments of someone else's post. I'd encourage you to read some of my work to get a better understanding of my position. I lean toward positive, practical, incremental change.
I know that many of us have holistic frustrations with the status quo, but as someone who works within a complex system, I know that change happens when we identify measurable problems and offer pragmatic and actionable solutions. When we effect small changes, we inspire others to believe that more is possible, so let's start there.
I have no doubt these problems exist on some scale, but I'm going to echo several others commenting here by noting that this post lacks credible sourcing at many points. In sounding an alarm about extreme conditions credible sources are essential. Overstatement and inaccuracy will undermine efforts to alert people broadly and mobilize change. I read Ted Gioia's substack and respect his work, but this is not his lane and the research behind it isn't of a quality to repost.
That said, it may be that every claim here is true. The staff at After Babel could do worse than to rebuild Mr. Gioia's points on the basis of more convincing documentation.
I do not like that these claims clearly span from kindergardeners to highschoolers, yet do not mention which age range the specific claim is revelant. I'm not shocked if kindergardeners don't know their multiplication tables. I would be shocked if highschoolers are so weak they cannot hold a pencil. As others have mentioned there does not seem to be a lot of evidence supporting these claims.
While I'm very concerned and think this is an important post, I thought some things were unnecessarily sensationalized and sort of "Boomer-coded". My perspective is of someone who finished school in 2015, so experienced the introduction of smartphones to schools firsthand.
"Entire platforms dedicated to watching people play!" Yes, and? I agree it's alarming young kids prefer to watch others play with dolls instead of playing themselves. But to call out twitch in this context is absurd to me. I would bet adults have preferred for a long time to watch sports rather than play themselves. Can you imagine it? A sports channel?! Where you watch (!) games instead of playing yourself (!)? Watching (!) the Olympic games instead of competing yourself? Breaking: people bet on race horses instead of ruining the lap themselves... I don't want to critique the post too much because it points to important issues, but this point is bullshit.
"And it’s alarming that many of the most popular games (Fortnite, Minecraft, etc.) are about staying alive. We’ve come a long way from hopscotch and tag." This, as well, seems like such a nitpick. You can be "eliminated" in tag as well. Or dodgeball. The "IT" (is that term not dehumanising?) is "hunting" other kids. How terrible! Are you equally concerned these games are "about survival"? Chess is the simulation of two clashing armies, is it not a "brutal" game in this sense also, just because it is more abstract?
Very interesting that children are simultaneously concerned about their technology use, but resist it being taken away by circumventing parental controls. This is the behaviour of an addict.
I think your theme is valid, Mr. Hummler, but your specific arguments aren't persuasive. Sports channels don't invite people simply to watch others play sports; they offer professional sports that viewers both appreciate for excellence and generally can't themselves participate in. Downplaying of violence in video games by claiming that tag and chess are all about violence too is sophistry.
I over-respond to Boomer-coded things myself (the effects of age) so I'd appreciate it if you'd use your generational orientation to get me past my biases through a better-thought response. (I'm not being snarky. I'd like to hear a more careful moderating voice that alerts me to what I'm unlikely to see on my own.)
Of course that is also sophistry, this was my deliberate choice for a counter point. I took what I perceived to be the author's point ad absurdum by using his same logic to claim that games like chess and tag would then also have to be considered violent. No one could seriously claim that they are. Minecraft is about survival in the same way that taking a king with a rook is about trampling an enemy general with a cavalry regiment. Should one consider this violent? I don't but perhaps so. In any case it is virtual, abstracted violence, and not trusting young people to understand the difference (within reason, there should definitely be age limits on games, just as there are on movies) is not giving them enough credit.
Watching a Superbowl game on TV, for example, you are also reduced to an entirely passive consumer. This is, naturally, en exceptional competition at the highest level that is not accessible to everyone, else it would not be interesting to watch. The game of American football itself however, is accessible to all. If this invites participation, then watching games on twitch does as well. There are professional competitions to be found there, also.
I used to have a group of friends, with whom I regularly played competitive CS:GO. We would often watch professional competitions on twitch. They exist for e-sports as they do for any other.
Another interesting category is speedrunning, wherein you compete to complete a certain challenge, such as a level in a game, or even entire games themselves, in the lowest amount of time. Many games have thriving speedrunning scenes, even with different categories - for example, "the lowest time, in general", "lowest time, without exploiting bugs in the game's software", or "lowest time completing 100% of the game with all extra content". I fail to see the difference between watching e-athletes and watching "regular" sports.
Even so-called "let's plays" have their place, where you do indeed watch others people play video games. However, this is often done to inform yourself about the game before making a purchasing decision and playing yourself. And even when it is done for entertainment, it is not necessarily a recplacement for the game. I might watch a Let's Play for a game I would never have played myself because the Let's Player excells at some aspect of it in an awe inspiring way. If a completely average person starts streaming a popular game, they will get 0 views, maybe 1 or 2. The popular streamers excell in some way at what they do, which makes them interesting to watch. The example given in the text, with the kids watching other kids play with toys INSTEAD OF playing themselves is alarming. But things are more nuanced than branding entire video streaming platforms as replacement for real activity.
I wrote a more nuanced piece some years ago on my Substack, that among other things makes an attempt to explain why young people increasingly engage with digital worlds over the real (titled "Is the cure to male loneliness a Substack publication?"). It is possible to argue from a standpoint of demographics as well, neglecting psychology completely.
So powerful! Do you know where this stat comes from: "The average child now plays outside for only 4–7 minutes per day?" I went to 1000 Hours Outside post that is linked, but that has no citation. Would love to see this and be able to share it, but would want to link to the actual study. Thank you!
According to that link, "The “4 to 7 minutes” figure is an old number – over two decades old, in fact. It comes from a survey of children’s habits covering the years 1981-2003. It’s also a very specific number – in the survey, “outdoor activities” is a separate category from “sports” and “playing.” And it may not account for school recess (“school” is another category)."
I have witnessed this decline of childhood first hand working in public schools for over 25 years! What we are collectively doing to children and childhood feels like abuse on so many levels, it is no wonder their mental health is declining! I am hopeful because it seems that many are waking up to this and demanding change.
Just how horrifying does this have to get before we’re prepared to address the obvious root of every single problem listed here? As a former surgeon, I learned that treatment depends on proper diagnosis, but we are failing to identify our most basic and universal human need before we embark on crusades to solve the problems of children—and mankind. All these 30 “Facts” or discussions miss the point that we have failed to identify the paramount need we all have, which intuitively we already know. We need to feel loved. The Beatles knew this—as did Gandhi, Jesus, and Ariel Sharon, to name a few—but we are crippled by our ignorance of the kind of love we need most. From childhood, we need love that is unconditional, the kind we don’t have to earn, the kind with no taint of disappointment or irritation, the kind of love utterly unknown to most of us. Without this kind of love, there is no hope for solving the myriad baffling problems we now face. We tend to believe that we know what love is, but our anger, conflict, and victimhood—at home and in society—are undeniable proof that we do not. We can learn—right now—how to find this kind of love for ourselves and our children. With it, we can achieve lasting peace, rather than stamping out the fires around us. Go to the free websites RealLove.com and RealLoveParents.com, where I offer thirty years of intense experience with teaching parents and children all over the world.
I suggest ONE fact about our children that should terrify us: We want them to be convenient, comfortable, and quiet, rather than challenged and capable. More than anything else, they need unconditional love from us, not soothing trinkets or techniques. See RealLove.com for 30 years of professional research and application on this subject.
I appreciate this piece for being heartfelt. I see the author is also a musician. I’d love to hear these ideas turned into a song, and see it in music video format. The impact might be greater through a creative medium. It could be like Van Morrison’s 2021 “Why Are You On Facebook?”
First we need to ban one to one iPads and computers in schools. Then put a label on them that says not for children under 12. I hate that the government needs to enforce this stuff but unfortunately they are like cigarettes, except they cause brain damage instead of lung damage. Attention spans are so important for children, they determine how easily they learn and how well they will do in school. Tech is shrinking attention spans. Just walk into a middle school classroom, the kids have turned into memes. It’s miserable to be around. Parents, please don’t let your kids scroll on the internet. Wake up. I’ve been a teacher for 23 years, I watched tech wash through my high school classroom, it destroyed the kids with cell phones. Now they’ve banned cell phones but given kids computers, it’s just as bad, they are off task constantly (gaming, watching YouTube, shopping, air dropping, chatting). Parents, show up at your next school board meeting and tell them you don’t want the one to one iPads, ask to opt out. I’m on an elementary school board now, and guess how many complaints I’ve gotten from parents about iPads, zero. But whenever I talk to my parent friends they all agree, they don’t want their on screens. We need to rise up and do something about it. My kids are 9 and 11, I’ve never given them my phone or an iPad, but guess what, their school gave them iPads. I’m disgusted by it and fighting it.
My children are on the older side of Gen Z and on top of it I was an old school parent who held out on electronics . My children now adults have been sounding the alarm bells as well and see the harm it is causing. Prof. haidt has been telling us for some time now about the harm that is befalling this generation. It isn’t an exaggeration. And if you think it is you are truly fooling yourselves. My kids tell me all the time they will be old school. They are so shocked when we go to dinner and toddlers are glued to iPads/ phones. They always say - what happened to wiki stiks and crayons?? WAKE UP PEOPLE. Who would have guessed Wall-e would turn out to be non-fiction
So I tend to agree with this, but some of the sources seem...not to be the greatest?
The first link just goes to a blog post that cites "the current statistics", and "4–7 minutes" doesn't actually seem to be based on current rigorous studies (unless someone knows of an actual source?).
The point that students are "struggling to remember almost anything" leads to a page that, as far as I can tell, doesn't say anything of the sort.
The assertion that kids "don’t know multiplication tables" comes from a study done in India – of course, math skills in India (and anywhere) are important, but we don't know what the situation was there previously; the article only mentions that there was a (slight) dip in overall math scores since 2017. I taught in a developing country pre-smartphones and most of the kids there didn't know their times tables, so this may be about educational inequality rather than technology.
Other links go to Reddit and even TikTok...it's always been easy to find anecdotal evidence that "kids today" are so much worse than they used to be.
Some of the other links are more difficult for me to quickly assess, but it's not clear that they all come from unbiased sources or large-scale studies.
I write this as a supporter and someone who is personally convinced that the overuse of technology has been a disaster for childhood (and adulthood). And I've only heard good things about The Honest Broker. I just think we have to be careful to build our arguments on the firmest foundation possible.
I agree wholeheartedly with these comments that the evidence needs to be better.
I recall some headlines in British media quoting some teachers who said their kindergarten students couldn’t hold a pencil or go to the bathroom by themselves.
Horrifying - if true — but highly anecdotal.
Agreed. #3 is definitely not a “fact.” The article leads to a scare mongering quote from a guy who then tries to get people to buy his new book. Where’s the actual research?
We know autism is largely genetic, and autism causes children to be more interested in things and less interested in people. Recent research concluded the relationship between autism and early screentime was likely NOT causal - it's that autism causes the preoccupation with screens rather than screens causing children to be autistic.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2825501
For the really worst ones like not remembering their own name I definitely would demand stronger evidence. (The one I do believe is not being able to read a traditional clock. But when have they ever seen one? Sometimes traditional technologies do become left behind. Remember when Sam Cooke lamented that he didn't know what a slide rule was for? Now nobody does.)
This! This this this!!!
This needs to be shared far and wide, read by every parent and policy maker. This is exactly what us teachers have been seeing and saying. But nobody listens to teachers. Thank you.
I tried to follow the links back to the statements about children's inability to use a knife or have difficulties with using the bathroom. All links were paywalled, but after some sleuthing, it turns out the source appears to be a blog, Netmoms, which doesn't link to any data. I think Ted Gioia and Johnathan Haidt are intelligent, thoughtful writers. But this is sloppy work that misinforms and has no place in their work. Shameful, I expect more.
As a teacher, I think it’s imperative that we mobilize our schools toward a solution. Schools are one of the few remaining places where we can protect and provide the developmental conditions that kids actually need to thrive. They ought to be sanctuaries — havens of embodied connection. I wholeheartedly believe this is possible:
https://walledgardenedu.substack.com/p/when-childhood-conditions-change?r=f74da&utm_medium=ios
Totally agree that the focus should be thriving. Are you suggesting a complete restructuring of the school? I truly mean from the bottom up?
The most obvious issue that showcase this: There is no place to rest in a school. Stress is the number one killer in the world, yet we give no place for kids to rest or relax in the most important place of their development. Rest, ironically, makes you better.
And if one think that is normal. Well, sorry to say, but you worldview is one of the problems that you should re-examine. The way we live is not normal. At all. It is time we really start questioning the most abnormalized things in our society.
As I think social media is bad, but we also know that humans who suffer want to be distracted. Sometimes removing a coping mechanism can actually hurt a person more if you do not fix the cause. In this case, that can be also focusing on improving and making it easier to make friends. As we see with the healthy "no drinking or smoking". Alcohol and smoking was actually really important ways for humans to regulate their emotions from a super stressful society. When we removed that easy way of adjusting, it meant that we actually got more stressed but a healthier. Alcohol served as the oil to reduce social fear.
This is just one absurd example of how we structured modern society without even questioning it anymore. We need to get to the cause of things.
If you look at school objectively, it is a place that is have more resemblance with a prison than an a healthy place to be in. This post from Psychology today lays it out how we completely mismatched school with our ancestral origin:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/darwins-subterranean-world/202603/4-mismatches-between-evolution-and-education
If we keep pushing people into systems that are highly dysfunctional it will keep producing dysfunctional individuals. And now is the time for a complete re-haul as AI is changing everything.
There's a lot here - too much to address in the comments of someone else's post. I'd encourage you to read some of my work to get a better understanding of my position. I lean toward positive, practical, incremental change.
I know that many of us have holistic frustrations with the status quo, but as someone who works within a complex system, I know that change happens when we identify measurable problems and offer pragmatic and actionable solutions. When we effect small changes, we inspire others to believe that more is possible, so let's start there.
I have no doubt these problems exist on some scale, but I'm going to echo several others commenting here by noting that this post lacks credible sourcing at many points. In sounding an alarm about extreme conditions credible sources are essential. Overstatement and inaccuracy will undermine efforts to alert people broadly and mobilize change. I read Ted Gioia's substack and respect his work, but this is not his lane and the research behind it isn't of a quality to repost.
That said, it may be that every claim here is true. The staff at After Babel could do worse than to rebuild Mr. Gioia's points on the basis of more convincing documentation.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I do not like that these claims clearly span from kindergardeners to highschoolers, yet do not mention which age range the specific claim is revelant. I'm not shocked if kindergardeners don't know their multiplication tables. I would be shocked if highschoolers are so weak they cannot hold a pencil. As others have mentioned there does not seem to be a lot of evidence supporting these claims.
While I'm very concerned and think this is an important post, I thought some things were unnecessarily sensationalized and sort of "Boomer-coded". My perspective is of someone who finished school in 2015, so experienced the introduction of smartphones to schools firsthand.
"Entire platforms dedicated to watching people play!" Yes, and? I agree it's alarming young kids prefer to watch others play with dolls instead of playing themselves. But to call out twitch in this context is absurd to me. I would bet adults have preferred for a long time to watch sports rather than play themselves. Can you imagine it? A sports channel?! Where you watch (!) games instead of playing yourself (!)? Watching (!) the Olympic games instead of competing yourself? Breaking: people bet on race horses instead of ruining the lap themselves... I don't want to critique the post too much because it points to important issues, but this point is bullshit.
"And it’s alarming that many of the most popular games (Fortnite, Minecraft, etc.) are about staying alive. We’ve come a long way from hopscotch and tag." This, as well, seems like such a nitpick. You can be "eliminated" in tag as well. Or dodgeball. The "IT" (is that term not dehumanising?) is "hunting" other kids. How terrible! Are you equally concerned these games are "about survival"? Chess is the simulation of two clashing armies, is it not a "brutal" game in this sense also, just because it is more abstract?
Very interesting that children are simultaneously concerned about their technology use, but resist it being taken away by circumventing parental controls. This is the behaviour of an addict.
I think your theme is valid, Mr. Hummler, but your specific arguments aren't persuasive. Sports channels don't invite people simply to watch others play sports; they offer professional sports that viewers both appreciate for excellence and generally can't themselves participate in. Downplaying of violence in video games by claiming that tag and chess are all about violence too is sophistry.
I over-respond to Boomer-coded things myself (the effects of age) so I'd appreciate it if you'd use your generational orientation to get me past my biases through a better-thought response. (I'm not being snarky. I'd like to hear a more careful moderating voice that alerts me to what I'm unlikely to see on my own.)
Of course that is also sophistry, this was my deliberate choice for a counter point. I took what I perceived to be the author's point ad absurdum by using his same logic to claim that games like chess and tag would then also have to be considered violent. No one could seriously claim that they are. Minecraft is about survival in the same way that taking a king with a rook is about trampling an enemy general with a cavalry regiment. Should one consider this violent? I don't but perhaps so. In any case it is virtual, abstracted violence, and not trusting young people to understand the difference (within reason, there should definitely be age limits on games, just as there are on movies) is not giving them enough credit.
Watching a Superbowl game on TV, for example, you are also reduced to an entirely passive consumer. This is, naturally, en exceptional competition at the highest level that is not accessible to everyone, else it would not be interesting to watch. The game of American football itself however, is accessible to all. If this invites participation, then watching games on twitch does as well. There are professional competitions to be found there, also.
I used to have a group of friends, with whom I regularly played competitive CS:GO. We would often watch professional competitions on twitch. They exist for e-sports as they do for any other.
Another interesting category is speedrunning, wherein you compete to complete a certain challenge, such as a level in a game, or even entire games themselves, in the lowest amount of time. Many games have thriving speedrunning scenes, even with different categories - for example, "the lowest time, in general", "lowest time, without exploiting bugs in the game's software", or "lowest time completing 100% of the game with all extra content". I fail to see the difference between watching e-athletes and watching "regular" sports.
Even so-called "let's plays" have their place, where you do indeed watch others people play video games. However, this is often done to inform yourself about the game before making a purchasing decision and playing yourself. And even when it is done for entertainment, it is not necessarily a recplacement for the game. I might watch a Let's Play for a game I would never have played myself because the Let's Player excells at some aspect of it in an awe inspiring way. If a completely average person starts streaming a popular game, they will get 0 views, maybe 1 or 2. The popular streamers excell in some way at what they do, which makes them interesting to watch. The example given in the text, with the kids watching other kids play with toys INSTEAD OF playing themselves is alarming. But things are more nuanced than branding entire video streaming platforms as replacement for real activity.
I wrote a more nuanced piece some years ago on my Substack, that among other things makes an attempt to explain why young people increasingly engage with digital worlds over the real (titled "Is the cure to male loneliness a Substack publication?"). It is possible to argue from a standpoint of demographics as well, neglecting psychology completely.
So powerful! Do you know where this stat comes from: "The average child now plays outside for only 4–7 minutes per day?" I went to 1000 Hours Outside post that is linked, but that has no citation. Would love to see this and be able to share it, but would want to link to the actual study. Thank you!
Unfortunately, I don't think it's based on an "actual study". The best info I could find quickly was this: https://www.horizonhealthnews.com/the-truth-about-children-and-outdoor-play/
According to that link, "The “4 to 7 minutes” figure is an old number – over two decades old, in fact. It comes from a survey of children’s habits covering the years 1981-2003. It’s also a very specific number – in the survey, “outdoor activities” is a separate category from “sports” and “playing.” And it may not account for school recess (“school” is another category)."
I have witnessed this decline of childhood first hand working in public schools for over 25 years! What we are collectively doing to children and childhood feels like abuse on so many levels, it is no wonder their mental health is declining! I am hopeful because it seems that many are waking up to this and demanding change.
At the core level, screens are interrupting a child's ability to develop skills that make us human, this is a true social dilemma! https://dencham.substack.com/p/a-world-unseen-the-real-social-dilemma
Just how horrifying does this have to get before we’re prepared to address the obvious root of every single problem listed here? As a former surgeon, I learned that treatment depends on proper diagnosis, but we are failing to identify our most basic and universal human need before we embark on crusades to solve the problems of children—and mankind. All these 30 “Facts” or discussions miss the point that we have failed to identify the paramount need we all have, which intuitively we already know. We need to feel loved. The Beatles knew this—as did Gandhi, Jesus, and Ariel Sharon, to name a few—but we are crippled by our ignorance of the kind of love we need most. From childhood, we need love that is unconditional, the kind we don’t have to earn, the kind with no taint of disappointment or irritation, the kind of love utterly unknown to most of us. Without this kind of love, there is no hope for solving the myriad baffling problems we now face. We tend to believe that we know what love is, but our anger, conflict, and victimhood—at home and in society—are undeniable proof that we do not. We can learn—right now—how to find this kind of love for ourselves and our children. With it, we can achieve lasting peace, rather than stamping out the fires around us. Go to the free websites RealLove.com and RealLoveParents.com, where I offer thirty years of intense experience with teaching parents and children all over the world.
I suggest ONE fact about our children that should terrify us: We want them to be convenient, comfortable, and quiet, rather than challenged and capable. More than anything else, they need unconditional love from us, not soothing trinkets or techniques. See RealLove.com for 30 years of professional research and application on this subject.
I appreciate this piece for being heartfelt. I see the author is also a musician. I’d love to hear these ideas turned into a song, and see it in music video format. The impact might be greater through a creative medium. It could be like Van Morrison’s 2021 “Why Are You On Facebook?”
Hey man, this so important/all kinds of crazy! Have you thought about translating it into Spanish?
Can I translate this for you guys into Spanish?
First we need to ban one to one iPads and computers in schools. Then put a label on them that says not for children under 12. I hate that the government needs to enforce this stuff but unfortunately they are like cigarettes, except they cause brain damage instead of lung damage. Attention spans are so important for children, they determine how easily they learn and how well they will do in school. Tech is shrinking attention spans. Just walk into a middle school classroom, the kids have turned into memes. It’s miserable to be around. Parents, please don’t let your kids scroll on the internet. Wake up. I’ve been a teacher for 23 years, I watched tech wash through my high school classroom, it destroyed the kids with cell phones. Now they’ve banned cell phones but given kids computers, it’s just as bad, they are off task constantly (gaming, watching YouTube, shopping, air dropping, chatting). Parents, show up at your next school board meeting and tell them you don’t want the one to one iPads, ask to opt out. I’m on an elementary school board now, and guess how many complaints I’ve gotten from parents about iPads, zero. But whenever I talk to my parent friends they all agree, they don’t want their on screens. We need to rise up and do something about it. My kids are 9 and 11, I’ve never given them my phone or an iPad, but guess what, their school gave them iPads. I’m disgusted by it and fighting it.
My children are on the older side of Gen Z and on top of it I was an old school parent who held out on electronics . My children now adults have been sounding the alarm bells as well and see the harm it is causing. Prof. haidt has been telling us for some time now about the harm that is befalling this generation. It isn’t an exaggeration. And if you think it is you are truly fooling yourselves. My kids tell me all the time they will be old school. They are so shocked when we go to dinner and toddlers are glued to iPads/ phones. They always say - what happened to wiki stiks and crayons?? WAKE UP PEOPLE. Who would have guessed Wall-e would turn out to be non-fiction