|
|
|
|
|
by dav_Oz
640 days ago
|
|
Surprisingly it is obvious for Gen Z that social media in its current form is highly addictive and destabilizing in terms of well-being because (usually framed as "mental health").
Since I'm older I had a more of a choice in terms of social media presence (and get away with basically none) the younger folks practically don't. Basically, I could have got "hooked" as my pre-frontal cortex was already fully developed and I kindly declined. Gen Z for the most part was confronted with the "choice" of small dopamine hits designed after the newest slot machine research [0][1] when they were underage. As others have pointed out the 90s-00s had its own limitations and frustrations so going back to that nobody is really nostalgic about that part but back then you had to at least choose video games (install it, meet the hardware requirements and get sufficiently proficient in it ;) ) to get to today's level of addiction which permeates mainstream online social interactions. [0]https://ihpi.umich.edu/news/social-media-copies-gambling-met... [1]https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11245-024-10031-0 |
|
Raising luddites that can't type won't serve them well over the course of their lives, but neither will allowing them to become tap-and-scroll dopamine zombies.
It's a difficult balance.
My strategy will undoubtedly evolve over time, but I suppose it could be summarized as "permit supportive technology, aggressively deny anything else"
Of particular note is that most, if not all, "for kids" content is actively harmful.
The key to making things work is having a cohort of parents that have similar priorities. If the parents in your social group default to shutting Junior up with an iPad, you're going to have a bad time.