while I agree with your position to a point, does the same apply if you're acting from a position of privilege rather than one of denial? I.e. you have a high

while I agree with your position to a point, does the same apply if you're acting from a position of privilege rather than one of denial? I.e. you have a high income highly educated tech savvy population in your immediate vicinity and you primarily mix with other highly educated high income people physically day to day in your immediate surrounds. while I agree that it is detrimental for society and problematic for these bubbles to be forming, I'm not immediately seeing the disservice to the child from a locally optimal point of view in denying them media consumption and social networking, if you assume that 'a digitally connected world' is essentially marketing speak to get lower class and less educated people to normalize media consumption and social networking. By all means I agree a child needs access to, and ideally to understand programming and computers, but I'm not convinced participation in those other activities are necessary from a locally optimal social perspective except to work in the interests of those who control those mediums and want people to participate in them. obviously?, if you're at a vanilla middle class school and everyone is watching marvel comics, consuming Disney, and sharing their lives on Facebook, and your kids is the only one that isn't, they're going to have a bad time. And I'm not saying I'm a member of that higher class (far from it, although I don't yet take it as a given that I live in a community that doesn't primarily deal face to face, or that my neighbors aren't for the most part highly educated). indeed, I would say this attitude that adtech and media consumption and large scale social networking is harmful isn't a strange position to take amongst those with experience with those things. Like junk food and trash television, sometimes the ability to exclude is a privilege, not a cost...