(Note: currently no presidential candidate reflects most of my views, and I do not yet know whether or for whom I will vote. When I do, I certainly will not write about it here! As I hope will be obvious, this blog post is not an endorsement or disavowal of anyone. Instead it is ultimately about the technology discussion itself.)
As far as I am aware, Andrew Yang is the only presidential candidate talking about the negative impact of smartphones on kids. He seems to take a research-first approach, which is encouraging to see. His goals are:
– Work to understand emerging technologies impact on human health and behavior
– Find a way to promote responsible smartphone usage, both within the industry and within the users
He does refer to some statistics without citing them, and he does make some bold claims without referring to any known statistics. Sample quote:
Teenagers are spending more time worrying about whether their online acquaintances like their recent post than they are in person with their friends hanging out and developing social skills. The average teenager spends Friday nights at home, interacting with a machine, instead of out with friends at a game or event.
But that is from his campaign website after all; he is an aspiring politician, not a researcher. He also says some things that resonate with me:
Those who have worked within the industry describe the work they’ve done in stark terms. Often relating apps to slot machines, they say that the smartest minds of a generation are spending their time getting teenagers to click on ads and obsess over social media posts to see how many acquaintances respond or react to their posts.
In short, many experts are worrying that the widespread adoption of a poorly understood technology have destroyed the psyches of a generation.
Less inspiring to me is his proposed solution to create a Department of the Attention Economy that “focuses specifically on smartphones and social media, gaming and chat apps and how to responsibly design and use them, including age restrictions and guidelines.” And he wants Tristan Harris to lead it. I’m skeptical that regulation will be effective and efficient, or produce the desired outcome. I’m pretty sure the very concept of “the attention economy” is Harris’s invention, and it’s contestable and unproven.
From a policy standpoint, I’d much rather see a long-term education and public service campaign that simply discourages parents from giving smartphones to their children, and perhaps even from owning them themselves without a specific compelling reason.
Still, I’m glad Yang is talking about this, and that the notion of putting restrictions around computing technology usage is on the table. (I’d prefer them to be culturally rather than legally enforced, but I guess you have to start somewhere.) My hope is it will inspire other candidates to respond, and that this topic will become part of the national conversation.
Of course, the risk is that these issues will be politicized, and that the solutions people support will be mostly predicted by which party or candidate they support, and that would be a terrible outcome. In fact, I think it’s likely to happen. So in some ways, I’m also really horrified that Andrew Yang is talking about this!
All the more reason why it should be a conversation first and foremost within the technology industry.