Four hands | What if we limited the use of screens?

There’s a lot of talk about the omnipresence of screens in our lives these days. As if we realized (finally!) that the situation has become untenable, especially for children. It is documented that our young people move less, play less outside and spend more time alone in front of a screen. What if we rationed their use? Our columnists discuss it.

Nathalie Collard: In France, the former Minister of National Education, Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, proposes limiting the internet to 3 GB per person per week^⁠1. In England, the newspaper The Guardian launched a program to reduce screen time: 100,000 people have signed up and, so far, have reduced their screen time by 40% on average^⁠2. In Quebec, the Parti Québécois, which is proposing several measures, is urging the government to take screens out of classrooms. It seems that we are finally becoming aware of the damage caused by (too long) time spent in front of screens, especially among children. Should we legislate to protect people from themselves? I find it a little excessive, but at the same time, without guidelines, it seems that we are incapable of self-discipline. What do you think ?

Alexandre Sirois: When reading you, the motto associated with Silicon Valley giants like Facebook (now Meta) and Google comes to mind: “Move fast, break things.” This approach allowed them to profoundly change our societies in the space of a few years. In their eyes: a success, most certainly. But we now realize that among what they break, there are… lives. At the start of the year, the leaders of Meta, . Is anyone convinced by their mea culpa? Not me. In short, the first part of my answer to your question is that we must start by making these companies responsible. Bringing order to the Wild West.

Nathalie Collard: I completely agree with you. These companies have a social responsibility and a duty to behave as good corporate citizens. Will we be able to put the toothpaste back in the tube? I’m not sure, but it’s worth a try. At the same time, we must also take responsibility. Our colleague Patrick Lagacé recently wrote columns in which he addresses the subject of our crazy lives. Among others, he gave the floor to the pediatrician Jean-François Chicoine^⁠3. It’s been years since the D^r Chicoine is sounding the alarm about screens, but it seems that the “timing” is better today and that his speech carries more weight. Until the web giants adopt more responsible behavior, I think that parents will have no choice, they will have to play the “bad cops” and impose limits: to themselves first, then to their children.

Alexandre Sirois: I like the order in which you present this: first the parents and then the children. We tend to focus our spotlight on the behavior of the youngest. And that’s perfectly normal: they are more vulnerable. But parents must also take responsibility. I feel like as adults, and I am one of them, we underestimate the importance of setting boundaries. I even have proof! Last week, a survey caught my imagination. In the United States, 46% of teens aged 13 to 17 surveyed by the Pew Research Center said their parents were “sometimes or often distracted” by their phones during conversations with them. Brilliant idea: they also asked the parents of these teenagers. And only 31% admitted they get distracted when chatting with their children. You are right, we have a lot of difficulty in self-discipline. However, I cannot accept that the solution is to rely on the State to limit our use of the Internet.

Nathalie Collard: It’s extreme, I admit. But I don’t see any other options anymore. While reading on the subject, I came across dozens and dozens of documents in which we find lots of advice to better regulate the use of screens without demonizing technology. But who reads these documents? Who listens to the advice of experts? The other problem is that screens can be addictive. Faced with them, we have addicted behaviors that always come back for another dose. We haven’t yet talked about social networks whose architecture is precisely designed so that we come back to them again and again. So I say to myself that if we prohibit the sale of alcohol and tobacco to young people under 18 because we know that these substances are harmful to them, perhaps it is time to adopt the same approach for the screens ?

Alexandre Sirois: Some people might be startled when they see that you compare screens to alcohol and tobacco. Not me. The creators of social networks have created a monster that manipulates our brains. Ration? It seems difficult to me to reconcile such a proposal with the nature of our liberal democracies. But supervision, yes, it is essential. The status quo is untenable. Some states have already taken the bull by the horns, moreover. Florida has just adopted a law that seeks to prevent young people under the age of 14 from having access to social networks by toughening penalties against digital giants. And for teenagers aged 14 and 15, parental consent will be necessary. In total, elected officials from around thirty American states are trying to legislate this year to regulate the impact of social networks on children. But that won’t be enough. One day, elected officials here and elsewhere will have to dare to regulate the algorithms of the digital giants. The time has come to make social media less toxic.

1. Read the text “Najat Vallaud-Belkacem: “Let’s free ourselves from screens, let’s ration the internet!” » on the website Figaro

2. Read the text “I’m back!” : how Guardian readers reclaimed their brains and cut their screen times by 40%”

3. Read Patrick Lagacé’s column “Our crazy lives”

What do you think ? Participate in the dialogue