[rosser]

Of course it's true that most forms of media and entertainment have been subject to, "Won't someone THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!" responses from busy-bodies, fear-mongers, and others.

That in no way mitigates the fact that this medium is categorically different. None of newspapers, comics, D&D, TV, or any of those other things had immediate, real-time feedback adapted specifically to the individual user, and designed to weaponize the amygdala and dopamine responses to maximize engagement, at the cost of basically everything else.

Interactive tech brings a sea change in this phenomenon and its effectiveness. You can't meaningfully dismiss that, because it's predicated on the paltry shadow of what happened with non-interactive media.

EDIT: Consider, for example, the cohort of children whose early development screen time correlates profoundly strongly with their inability to hold a pencil. That's new. TV didn't do that. D&D didn't do that. Screens did.

[malvosenior]

I beg to differ. I think you're definitely overestimating the importance of individualization. TV has been doing all of these things for half a century. People will literally watch it all day and definitely become addicted.

Advertising has been "weaponizing the amygdala" for a century. It's designed to instill insecurity and envy.