5 ms·
>The minister said the ban was also a “public health message to families”, adding: “It’s good that children are not too often, or even at all, in front of a scr
by j9461701 9y ago
>The minister said the ban was also a “public health message to families”, adding: “It’s good that children are not too often, or even at all, in front of a screen before the age of seven.”
I remember being a little kid and wanting to learn about space and submarines and sharks, and not being able to. I'd read my local library's books on those subjects, but I lived in a little town with a puny library so quickly exhausted my supply of information. I'd have given my front teeth to have access to a tablet with wikipedia access - even just one geocities article on Great Hammerheads would've made me jump for joy.
Information diving on subjects you're interested in is one of the greatest boons of the modern age, and I think it's a terrible thing to deny a curious child. Yes a kid can spend all day every day on facebook or twitter or watching youtube videos, but to say all kids shouldn't have access because some might turn into little zombies is foolish. Assuming usage is properly curated by parents or other authority figures, smart devices can be some of the most powerful tools for educating children this side of a Greek tutor.
Also this is a hobby horse as old as time. "New Techology is evil, and it's corrupting our youth like never before!" It wasn't true with TV, or radio, or codexes, or writing itself, and I see no reason this time in particular should be exceptional.
>“This new announcement from the [education] ministry leaves us dubious because we’re having trouble understanding what is the real issue here. In general, we’re used to them being logical and pragmatic about things, and here, we can’t find the logic or the pragmatism in the announcements,” said Philippe Vincent, the union’s deputy general secretary.
Ah. So it's a meaningless publicity stunt that will never go anywhere, and the original promise was a cynical election ploy to win the votes of luddities. Due credit to Macron’s administration though, at least they're making token efforts to stick to their campaign promises.
>“In ministerial meetings, we leave our phones in lockers before going in. It seems to me that this as doable for any human group, including a class,” Blanquer said in September.
Do you seriously see no difference between between a handful of elderly government officials leaving their phones in individual lockers guarded by armed men while they discuss affairs of state for hours on end, and hundreds of 8 year olds putting their iPhone 65s in unguarded communal bins while they run around for 15 minutes and then have to retrieve them again?
- icelancer 9y ago>The minister said the ban was also a “public health message to families”, adding: “It’s good that children are not too often, or even at all, in front of a screen before the age of seven.” Citation-fucking-required for this one, with conclusive evidence proving that it's true for all kids under seven. AKA he pulled it out of his ass.
- hycaria 9y agoWhy do you seem so angry about this ?
- aluhut 9y agoThere is a frightening amount of people having huge problems with the rule on here. I'd guess they are quite young and grew up in this unregulated time, not even knowing what they've missed.
- rekado 9y agoHere's an opinionated overview: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mental-wealth/201402/gray-matters-too-much-screen-time-damages-the-brain https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mental-wealth/201402/gr... It is not even an unreasonable assumption that things that are fine for adults may not be harmless for developing brains. But it seems that---as usual---this topic is poorly understood as there may be confounding factors that are not controlled for. A counterpoint is given here: https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2013/aug/29/screen-time-mental-health-children https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2013/aug/2...
- qball 9y ago>Information diving on subjects you're interested in is one of the greatest boons of the modern age, and I think it's a terrible thing to deny a curious child. Yes a kid can spend all day every day on facebook or twitter or watching youtube videos, but to say all kids shouldn't have access because some might turn into little zombies is foolish. I don't think you understand the core concept here. See, the most important thing here is to make sure no kid has the opportunity to be zombified by media. And it's true that some will end up this way. So, the kid who is competent to deal with the technology has no intrinsic right to that competence or the benefits that competence brings, because doing so would [theoretically] jeopardize those who aren't so gifted. Therefore Society has a moral right to suppress them. That's the only logic that's going on here. And it's objectively correct: there are absolutely no long-term detriments to a society's ability to progress whatsoever when that society makes it policy to cut its most capable off at the knees.