Confession of a Baby Boomer: I get far more annoyed than amused when I see a group of youngsters hanging out together with all eyes glued to the cellphones in their hands. Most recently that includes some of my mid-tier grandkids who I’ve watched go from criticizing their older cousins’ phone addictions to now being the ones who can’t seem to put their own digital pacifiers down.
What grandma, after all, wants to be replaced by an algorithm?
So there’s plenty of reason to celebrate recent headlines that indicate the grown-ups in the room are starting to say enough is enough.
After years of allowing kids to have nearly unfettered access to the devices in their pockets, Illinois moved toward a bell-to-bell cellphone restriction in schools, which requires all districts to have smartphone bans in place before the 2027-28 school year.
Last week, Silicon Valley’s grip on our kids was loosened more when, rather than continue a trial over a 47-state multibillion-dollar lawsuit, Meta agreed to a settlement worth up to $18 billion, as well as more restrictions on Facebook and Instagram that include a two-hour daily limit for teens, nighttime restrictions, school-hour notification limits, hidden “likes,” stronger age verification and additional parental controls with more aggressive efforts to keep children under 13 off the platforms.
All of which should be applauded. But where was this five years ago? Ten years ago? Why the heck did it take so long?
“That’s a good question,” admits Kyle Jennings, school-based therapy manager for Family Counseling Service in Aurora, who in his 12-year career has always seen social apps as significant culprits in the challenges young people can face.
In the “few hundred crisis calls” his team made to schools in southern Kane and Kendall counties last year, he told me, a “common factor is the child up until one in the morning messaging someone on Facebook Messenger, Snapchat or Discord rather than getting the sleep they need.”
It’s not like we’ve had no warnings. The red flags have been raised often, not just by social workers and therapists but by educators from elementary through college who have watched a striking difference in the way students learn, concentrate, communicate and process information.
Employers have noticed it as well, watching young workers struggle with attention, face-to-face communication and the ability to stay focused without reaching for a phone. And for heaven’s sake, even some of the architects of this digital world were sounding alarms over the the very addictions they helped create.
Yet the tech giants were allowed to keep designing increasingly sophisticated ways to keep youngsters glued to their screens – which is like telling a kid to eat less sweets while allowing a candy company to follow them around all day offering chocolate and lollipops.
We’ve all been suckers to some degree. I know plenty of mothers and fathers doing their best to limit screen time, only to find themselves battling peer pressure and the reality that, if everyone else has a phone, it’s awfully hard being the kid who doesn’t.
Which is why parents are applauding these new restrictions on Facebook and Instagram that take some of the pressure off them. But, they also realize it’s only a start.
“I honestly don’t believe kids under 18 should be allowed to have social media at all,” says Angelica Javier, a Batavia mother of three. “I know 18 doesn’t magically make someone mature, but you have to draw the line somewhere. There’s just not enough good that comes from social media at that age to outweigh the risks.”
Plus, as a few moms of my own grandkids point out, there’s a glaring limit to how much control any parent can have when the social media universe extends far beyond Meta. Take away Facebook or Instagram and there’s still Snapchat, TikTok, Discord and a parade of other apps ready to fill the void.
Also worth noting, this settlement does not fundamentally change the addictive design of social media, which taps into the brain’s reward system. Every notification, every “like” or new piece of content delivers a hit of dopamine, creating a loop of anticipation, reward and repetition, says Jennings, adding that when kids who are struggling get their phones taken away, they don’t have a healthy “arsenal of tools at their disposal” – such as routines, hobbies or family support.
That’s why he sees some of the restrictions now being imposed as an opportunity to “create space” for deeper, more well-rounded and sustainable coping options.
“There are plenty of ways to handle life’s stress,” the therapist says. “Childhood is supposed to be a time to figure out what works and what doesn’t.”
Now in his late 30s, Jennings recalls getting a detention in high school when the cellphone in his pocket buzzed from his mother calling, Times have certainly changed, he notes while also expressing hope the pendulum is swinging “in the right direction.”
These new restrictions could be part of a broader “social media reckoning,” says Jennings, pointing to YouTube shutting down comments on kids’ videos years ago, and to Discord and Roblox making changes on their own as concerns about kids and technology have grown.
“Education in general,” he added, is even beginning to recognize that relying on “tablet-based learning hasn’t been as effective as they had hoped.”
Jennings is convinced that if we want our kids to develop discipline and control, we “need to be wary of shortcuts.”
Yes, this big win against a tech giant is great, but we can’t just hand our children a device, turn on a parental control setting and call it good.
“I don’t think the makers of these apps, left to their own devices,” he concluded, “will look out for our kids.”
dcrosby@tribpub.com
