I think this is an example of limited perspective. I spent two recent summers working with kids ages 9-17 and was delighted at their curiosity, brightness, and

I think this is an example of limited perspective. I spent two recent summers working with kids ages 9-17 and was delighted at their curiosity, brightness, and willingness to get involved in elaborate conversations. Granted, the older kids were also trying to get in each others' pants, but that's the fun of being a kid, right? I don't mind the social networking junk too much either; it's detrimental in the short term but everybody I know is getting weary of how pointless it is. I've been reading A. S. Neill's fantastic Summerhill School, where he details the things he learned after 50 years of teaching children, and he argues that letting children play is essential to their growing up properly. Freedom to play eventually leads to kids deciding what they most enjoy doing, and it leads to them being more willing to work within their society. Since reading that, I've wondered if social networks aren't just our modern form of play: useless wastes of time objectively, but people will move on from them and find better things to do. (I hope. Facebook/the status feed are still only half a decade old. If five more years pass and everybody's still just as hooked, we've got a problem; I think we'll see feed obsession subside, but I could very well be wrong.)