[Lerc]

Removing a means of bullying that leaves a trail is not the same thing as removing bullying. It's just removing undeniable bullying.

If people truly agreed that children needed to be protected from the desires of others, teaching them that a particular religion is the true one would be restricted until they were of an age where they could provide informed consent.

For some, communication devices are the only way to escape that particular abuse.

[roelmore]

Forgive me if I am misinterpreting or getting in the way of your primary point -- but I think it is relatively well recognized that, though cyberbullying might not be objectively worse than analog bullying (obviously direct physical abuse/altercations cant happen electronically....yet), the 24/7 pervasiveness, anonymity, lack of emotional feedback for the bully, reach, and permanence of cyberbullying has had a meaningful impact on the state of the bullying game and the impacts it has on children.

That doesn't mean I agree with the general thrust of taking technology away from kids and young adults....I don't. But I do think we should probably understand the bad that we are taking with the good.

[nsxwolf]

I think a lot of people here just don't have kids of a relevant age yet. They assume either the bullying doesn't happen, or it isn't any different than bullying in person, or that it's easy to stop when it happens.

You can just not have phones, but it's socially isolating. You have to frequently audit what's on their phones because they often won't volunteer what's happening. You take them out of one group chat only to have the bullies reappear in another one.

Old fashioned bullying kept regular business hours. This gives them a portal into your home life 24/7, and that's the best case, when you put a ton of effort into managing it.

And if you're not having this problem somehow, you might want to double check and make sure your kid isn't the bully.

[fn-mote]

> You can just not have phones, but it's socially isolating.

I hear this plenty, but kids are literally forced to go be with their peers (hopefully including some friends) for 6+ hours a day (in my country). Don't they have enough time to arrange their social lives in person?

It’s not as bad as phone apologists say.

[j45]

Agreed, students in schools seem to be regularly reporting an improved environment as unmanaged phone use went away.

[Lerc]

Well I guess it is true that I don't have children of that age. My daughter is on the board of a charity that deals with youth issues though.

[what]

So neither you, nor your daughter, have any experience with the issue?

[Lerc]

I seem to recall both of us being children once, although admittedly not at the same time. The research my daughter does as part of her charity work probably counts as well.

[j45]

Learning about something doesn't invalidate it entirely on that basis alone, just like the experience of one parent doesn't speak for all parents, or those concerned about the impacts of phones on kids (who are future adults).

[j45]

I certainly wouldn’t speak about kids and bullying without knowing about both.

What works needs to be found.

[j45]

Removing phones doesn't remove a means of bullying, it removes a magnifier and multiplier of bullying.

There's lots of ways to capture bullying. But it might be hot water right? What if it was a watch with a camera? What if it was a camera alone? :)

Bullying is serious enough it can't be conflated with the desires of device manufacturers and social media platforms to manufacture young consumers of their feeds.

An issue here is the unfiltered internet is not capable of raising children, as much as they want to be exposed to everything, it doesn't work out the same for every child based on a whole host of independent factors than those who take the position above.

[marysol5]

"A trail" that will be ignored by the very same authority figures who ignore literally violence done in front of them.