Ctrl+Alt+Panic - The Anxious Generation

We are entitled to our opinions. Some more than others.

As a primer, Jonathan Haidt has a book out called The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness. He is a social psychologist and a professor at NYU. His book argues that the sharp rise in teen anxiety, depression, and mental illness stems from a major cultural shift around 2010, with the adoption of smartphones. There's data behind the book, and his actionables are to delay smartphones and social media, encourage more free play, and reform parenting and education to restore kids’ mental health.

He is an expert in his field and should be someone we listen to and model ourselves after. Yet, after listening to him talk to Dr Becky Kennedy on The Good Inside podcast about the book and his views, I had some aggressively opposing thoughts that fundamentally conflict with how I understand the world. This is just a rant post about what I find disturbing and objectionable about some of the things he says.

For ease of reference, the podcast and its transcript are where I'll be pulling his opinions from and talking about. I've tried to cohesively group my thoughts together. So, here're the RED FLAGS I spotted.

Framing and Golden Age Romanticization

"Childhood was changed from a form in which a human being could develop into a competent, mature adult to one that is inhospitable for human development... smartphones are experience blockers."

It's not so much any single point Jonathan makes as much as the totality and framing of his viewpoints without nuance. When defining topics in such an overgeneralization and catastrophizing way, it primes the topic towards negative judgment with no room for discourse.

He himself says that "kids are mostly okay" later on, but you can't have it both ways. You can't claim it is inhospitable, yet most kids are okay. Here.

"Obviously, look, most kids are okay. Most kids are doing fine. But a much larger number are not doing fine compared to kids who were born in the early 90s. So it’s really the late 90s as Gen Z, early 90s as Millennials, huge difference in their psychological outcomes."

Now, this really sounds like some "golden age" romanticizing idealization to me, that earlier generations have it better by default, and that psychological well-being in the early 90s is framed as a kind of baseline, and that Gen Z has significantly deteriorated in comparison.

We actually know for a fact that there were higher bullying rates, less mental health awareness, and a strong stigma against therapy. There are new problems that develop with new technology, yes, absolutely true. Cyberbullying is on the rise because of a new outlet to do so, and physical bullying has migrated. We have more understanding and acceptance towards mental health, which has caused an uptick in diagnoses and reporting.

But we cannot sweep it all under the rug and call the pre-smartphone era a healthier or more developmentally optimal time.

Oversimplication of the Problem

"By 2015... they almost all have social media... and now, once you take this thing, this thing is an experience blocker. So once you give this thing to a child, that’s it."

He gets really into the 2010-2015 part of it all. A single piece of technology, phone adoption, is the SOLE reason for the sharp "hockey stick graph" rise in ALL mental health issues suffered by children. I don't know if the numbers are verified, or if I can say if this is cherry picking or not. While it may be a contributing factor, he leaps to causation without sufficiently ruling out alternatives.

As an aside, I worked in the Ministry of Education for under a decade. My mother, sister, and wife are educators. I know for a fact that the educational landscape has drastically changed over the years, and childhood stress has been on a constant rise because of it. In tertiary education today, scoring perfectly is no longer viable to be a "good student". Extracurricular accolades, community service, leadership positions, and entrepreneurship endeavors are almost a necessity now. He himself alludes to this.

Parenting became, it became much more about how do I get my kid into a top college? How do I prepare my kid to compete with the other kids, rather than, my kid needs to play. So, parenting changed. Childhood changed, kids changed.

Academic and parental pressure, social instability, world events, even just increased diagnosis and reporting rates, are relevant. Mental Health acceptance is a revelation for our generation. So, yes, phones and social media may play a part in stress, but it is NOT the only thing that affects children. It is a classic slippery slope argument to advocate it so strongly as such.

One CANNOT simply point at handphones and say that's the cause on one hand, while speaking confidently against your own point in another.

Gambling...?

"If we agree that gambling is an addiction... well that’s exactly what’s happening to our kids with social media."

I don't have so much of a problem with statements like this as much as I think it's such a silly thing for a smart person to say. It's a false analogy to say that gambling is exactly like social media. Gamification, design principles, and gambling mechanics can apply to any field, not just social media. To equate precisely these 2 fundamentally different domains, coupled with statements that it is the SOLE reason for childhood depression and anxiety... I can't stand behind it.

But more than that...

"And of course, the social media companies literally copied Las Vegas. They literally copied, like you pull down to refresh and then it kind of like spins, like they took that from slot machines. So these things are engineered for addiction."

Of which this statement is 2 things.

1. Not remotely accurate. The refresh animation is actually more reminiscent of a washing machine (front-loading) than it is of a slot machine. If we're talking about pulling down motion, the design space of a touch screen is limited. Pinching for zooming, swiping left and right for back-forward, and swiping down for probably the next most utilized command, refresh.

2. A complete fabrication. There is absolutely no evidence that the refresh loading animation is taken from a slot machine.

3. A lack of understanding what causes social media addiction. We're talking doomscrolling, forums, positive feedback from gamified features with likes, shares, and comments. Very different from gambling. One could even argue that gambling is a solo activity while social media is a community activity.

It's just these sort of statements that raise that red alert in my brain when I hear them. Sweeping, unfounded, groundless statements that are meant to arbitrarily link or prove a point with absolutely no substance underneath.

"There are no more perverts in parks... they’re all on Instagram and TikTok."

This is where I think lines should be drawn. It is an exaggeration of online dangers that stokes moral panic. This is an alarmist attitude, which, if there were any good points in the Anxious Generation, is sullied by facetious and fear-based rhetoric such as this.

Smart people need to say smart things. If such things are said with full-hearted conviction, rational discourse is undermined.

And I think I can get into some of the things that I feel fundamentally against.

A Contradiction in Conflict

Jonathan Haidt is pro-conflict towards conflict between children. He frames it as beneficial and necessary for social development and growth.

"And the richest kind of experience they can have... get three or four kids playing together, let them play, there are going to be some conflicts, that’s the most nutritious thing you can do."

This, I generally have no problems with. I do believe that by helping our children, we take away from their struggles. In homework, with friendship, with siblings, in life. They get frustrated, they cry, they want to give up. By allowing them to feel these emotions and staying by them to monitor and regulate them, we give them the space to accept, solve, and grow. This is how school works, I would hope.

The best thing you can do for your kid is raise him or her to be one who can deal with frustration. Because life is going to be full of frustration. And if you take the frustration out of your kid’s life, you make them happier in the moment. But you’re depriving them of a future of competence and success.

Yes, absolutely. Developing grit. This I can get behind. Then, the kicker.

"But then you constantly have boundary skirmishes, you have little border wars over everything. And the kids are incentivized to cheat... you get into this cat and mouse game... which just leads to constant conflict, such a mess and confusion..."

While conflict is great between children, it is a burden when it occurs between child-parent. Jonathan Haidt believes conflict to be "nutritious" and valuable as long as it is convenient to him. Otherwise, it is a burden and undermines parental authority and clarity.

He continues to advocate clear, non-negotiable rules to avoid ANY conflict with your children.

I welcome conflict with my children. I believe every chance of a conflict is a chance for me to model proper conflict resolution. While my children may be able to resolve their own conflicts (clumsily), when they resolve conflicts with me, we wait till we're calm, and explain the situation logically and rationally. They are well within their right to negotiate, and we come to a compromise a lot.

Anecdotally, I see my son mirroring my calm resolution methods with his younger brother. He employs the things he learns with me in his own life, which he will lack if I led my children with an authoritative regime, as Jonathan Haidt seems to suggest doing.

Archaic Gender Tropes

Another thing I can't get behind is how antiquated some of his viewpoints seem to be on gender roles and tropes.

"So boys and girls, the differences in their interests are huge. Boys have more of what’s called a need for agency. They’re out trying to break things, build things. They’re much more interested in mechanical things. Girls and women are more oriented towards communion needs, relationships. They’re interested in what people’s relationships are. They remember each other’s birthdays. They know who’s mad at whom. So they’re just much more interested in the social world. So those are well-known gender differences."

 Sorry, girls don't have a need for agency? What sort of binary, oversimplified bullshit is this.

Sorry. Language.

It is misleading and stereotypical to force gender roles the way he's portraying them. This sort of antiquated thinking does not fly in today's society, and people who feel like this should be called out.

Coupled with parental dictatorship, enforced gender roles, and golden age nostalgia, I could not in good conscience listen to parenting advice from this person. There is no world which I would raise my children with these sorts of beliefs. And it is his beliefs that form the foundation of the book he wrote and the Anxious Generation.

Actionables

So, essentially, the 4 things he suggests to change this:

1. No smartphones before high school

2. No social media before 16

3. More free play

4. Stronger digital literacy education

I personally can get behind most, if not all of this, honestly. No smartphone before high school is a little much, in my opinion. I think it's cheaper to pass an old smartphone down to my kids than to go out to search for a usable brick phone and set it up to be able to contact them. Seriously, with iMessage and WhatsApp, we're going back to physical sim contracts and paid phones? No thank you.

Separately, parental controls are embedded everywhere, in every form of technology. It's going to take layers of Face ID, passwords, and F2P verifications before my sons break into the parental security settings to let them download apps on their phones.

Next, social media. Most social media requires the user to be at the age of 13 before participating. So sure, a little older is fine. I really don't have an issue with this. I wouldn't, personally, but I think for the more anxious parents, if they can stave it off, they should.

Then, I think digital literacy education is important across all areas of the internet. Sex-tortions, scamming, fake news, AI-generated content, etc. It's important for people to get with the times. My mum's using ChatGPT and I'm proud of her for doing so. She played Counterstrike with a bunch of senior teachers just to try to experience popular games to connect to their students more.

Embrace the change. Not defy it.

Conclusion

Logical fallacies were scattered throughout Jonathan Haidt's talk with Dr. Becky. It is clear he is not a critical thinker, which, primarily, I think is a large personal failing for someone in a position to change minds. Causation is not correlation. Oversimplification and targeting a common enemy for the people do not make defining problems easier or solve them faster.

Saying all this, I genuinely think that Jonathan Haidt means well. It's easy to jump to the conclusion that "Jonathan and his team" are using fearmongering tactics so people buy his book, but I think he genuinely cares enough about our future generation to consider this, despite the demonization of his warpath against handphones and social media.

The truth is, children are struggling. They have, they are, and they will continue to. Every generation's children will struggle with something different. And this is ours.

What's the phrase, "Only in America do people have the luxury of being depressed"?

Our children are living in a time of security and luxury. No more rampant child sickness and death. No more child labour. No more fears. They now have the time and space to emotionally grow and reflect. A side of this is, of course, identifying mental illnesses like depression and anxiety. That is a GOOD thing. Acknowledging the problem is the first step to solving it.

This "strawberry" generation will undoubtedly move the needle of work-home balance, of 4-day workweeks, of paternal leaves, and of self-care days. That is their prerogative to. And once they do, and the world has changed, the next generation after will find the next problem to solve.

Humanity has slowly but surely increased the quality of life for all of us. And... this is its consequence. We must learn to adapt and grow. We cannot try to bring back the past. We can only learn to look forward and be resilient to its coming challenges.