The way to reliably protect children is to give them the tools to be resilient in the face of modern technology, instead of shielding them from the reality of it.
Parents don't have to be 'tech savvy'. They have to be child savvy. As all parents should know if they spend enough time with their offspring, they need supervising and steered in the direction you think is good for them.Who doesn't remember being quizzed as a child about the what, where, who with, what for?And most importantly the big No, No you can't and that's final.
The problem with London is that there are very few lower middle-class or even the less wealthy type of middle-class people living there now. People are either rich or poor, and that isn't good for a society. It's always been fashionable to make fun of the middle and lower middle classes with vintage TV dramas like "The Good Life" and "Butterflies" but the truth IMO is they contribute a certain type of attitude to society which you don't have if you only have rich and poor people and nothing in between. Interesting article: unherd.com/2018/05/truth-liberal-london/?=refinnar
The smart people in silicon valley who design, program and market devices like the iphone and ipad do not allow their own children to use them. They are for adults.
Johnathan hadith, a widely recognised child psychologists has been saying unsupervised play time is important, just not on social media. Also seems like a lovely guest but always goes to the extreme. Once a kid was on xbox now his throats slit. Plus kids have been beating parents with tech since fire. We used to take picture of our homework and share it 10 years ago, she's got some catching up. Last point as well, I think most adults wouldn't be able to handle an xbox live cod lobby, all the swearing and hate, but it literally only effects the weakest people. Like even when I was 13 playing 18+ games I knew how to mute if someone was annoying. Should be teaching kids how to cope with different humans rather than to fear them.
I completely agree that childrens' unlimited exposure to the internet and social media is a new problem that definitely needs to be addressed. However, absolute control over your child is only going to guarantee them growing up with issues. Children have to make mistakes to learn, and the examples she's giving of the impacts of social media are extreme (Brett Bednar case etc.). This is only going to drum up hysteria which is probably going to make this problem even more difficult to solve.
Children can get everything they need from books, magazines, radio and TV documentaries. There's no need for social media, unless you accept that social pressure from other children is a valid reason. I don't.
Social media: I used to think that social media was barely either (the shallowest manifestation of the former utilizing-“consuming”-the lowest materializations of the latter); but now I’m pretty sure that the latter actually comes at the expense of the former; that it’s really the former that’s being consumed (digested, decomposed) by the latter. In the end, there might only be media; at the end, even worse.
No to social media because it's effectively a cesspool. Video games however has a positive social and developmental benefit to children *when used in moderation* . Parents need to educate themselves on the parental controls of every device they give their children and set appropriate measures.
My buddy works at a homeless shelter and he says many of them have smart phones newer than his, shopping at wally-world I see people using EBT cards holding smart phones (and sometimes their kids too) (no hate as I grew up poor and on welfare just pointing it out), I don't think people realize how "not poor" the poor are, at least in America. This is practically a non-issue.
I don't have a smartphone at all, I just have a laptop computer, because I think that's all you need. Also, you can only really use a laptop in a desk situation, which is more healthy than using a phone everywhere such as when walking along the street. It annoys me when I see people claiming to be very poor using smartphones because I can't really afford to buy one myself. They're not necessary to life. Most people lived perfectly okay 10 years ago without smartphones.
The way to reliably protect children is to give them the tools to be resilient in the face of modern technology, instead of shielding them from the reality of it.
I don't agree that 5 year olds should be given lessons on the dangers of smartphones, etc. Older children, yes.
We need more headteachers like Katharine Birbalsingh.
Parents don't have to be 'tech savvy'. They have to be child savvy. As all parents should know if they spend enough time with their offspring, they need supervising and steered in the direction you think is good for them.Who doesn't remember being quizzed as a child about the what, where, who with, what for?And most importantly the big No, No you can't and that's final.
The problem with London is that there are very few lower middle-class or even the less wealthy type of middle-class people living there now. People are either rich or poor, and that isn't good for a society. It's always been fashionable to make fun of the middle and lower middle classes with vintage TV dramas like "The Good Life" and "Butterflies" but the truth IMO is they contribute a certain type of attitude to society which you don't have if you only have rich and poor people and nothing in between. Interesting article: unherd.com/2018/05/truth-liberal-london/?=refinnar
The smart people in silicon valley who design, program and market devices like the iphone and ipad do not allow their own children to use them. They are for adults.
Johnathan hadith, a widely recognised child psychologists has been saying unsupervised play time is important, just not on social media. Also seems like a lovely guest but always goes to the extreme. Once a kid was on xbox now his throats slit.
Plus kids have been beating parents with tech since fire. We used to take picture of our homework and share it 10 years ago, she's got some catching up.
Last point as well, I think most adults wouldn't be able to handle an xbox live cod lobby, all the swearing and hate, but it literally only effects the weakest people. Like even when I was 13 playing 18+ games I knew how to mute if someone was annoying. Should be teaching kids how to cope with different humans rather than to fear them.
Johnathan Haidt - Hadith though is an amusing autocorrect
@@konnigkratz hahaha thanks for pointing that out. That's made my day, fucking Johnathan hadith 😅
I completely agree that childrens' unlimited exposure to the internet and social media is a new problem that definitely needs to be addressed.
However, absolute control over your child is only going to guarantee them growing up with issues. Children have to make mistakes to learn, and the examples she's giving of the impacts of social media are extreme (Brett Bednar case etc.). This is only going to drum up hysteria which is probably going to make this problem even more difficult to solve.
Children can get everything they need from books, magazines, radio and TV documentaries. There's no need for social media, unless you accept that social pressure from other children is a valid reason. I don't.
Social media: I used to think that social media was barely either (the shallowest manifestation of the former utilizing-“consuming”-the lowest materializations of the latter); but now I’m pretty sure that the latter actually comes at the expense of the former; that it’s really the former that’s being consumed (digested, decomposed) by the latter. In the end, there might only be media; at the end, even worse.
Some good parenting would be a start on helping people cope with technology.
No to social media because it's effectively a cesspool. Video games however has a positive social and developmental benefit to children *when used in moderation* . Parents need to educate themselves on the parental controls of every device they give their children and set appropriate measures.
My buddy works at a homeless shelter and he says many of them have smart phones newer than his, shopping at wally-world I see people using EBT cards holding smart phones (and sometimes their kids too) (no hate as I grew up poor and on welfare just pointing it out), I don't think people realize how "not poor" the poor are, at least in America. This is practically a non-issue.
I don't have a smartphone at all, I just have a laptop computer, because I think that's all you need. Also, you can only really use a laptop in a desk situation, which is more healthy than using a phone everywhere such as when walking along the street. It annoys me when I see people claiming to be very poor using smartphones because I can't really afford to buy one myself. They're not necessary to life. Most people lived perfectly okay 10 years ago without smartphones.