Prince Harry, long known for being an outspoken advocate (especially men) mental health problems, is currently focused on a very sensitive issue: social media and its impact on youth.
“In many cases, smartphones are stealing young people’s childhood,” he said in a conversation, a video of which was shared exclusively with Assets this week with a social psychologist Jonathan HaidtAuthor of The fearful generation.
Haidt – whose Four basic smartphone rules have inspired both celebrating and fighting back– couldn’t agree more and explained to Harry the premise of his book: that people born after 1995 (Gen Zapproximately) affect puberty at high rates throughout the English-speaking world Fear, depressionself-harm and suicidewhich all increased sharply between 2010 and 2012. And that this wasn’t a coincidence, but a direct result of the smartphone.
“Young people are trading in their flip phones for smartphones,” Haidt said of this moment of generational change, “and now with a front-facing camera, fast internet and a million apps competing to capture kids’ attention.” “So The Fearful Generation helps us understand the incredible destructive power of this childhood transformation… and what we can do now to prevent it and help those who have already gone through it.”
Haidt and the Duke of Sussex met at Harry’s for an intimate discussion (see full video below) about social media and mental health Archewell Foundation 2024 Insight Sessions – public conversations, the highlights of which appear in a new one Insight report– on the impact of technology, with youth voices at the center.
Here are some of the most impactful takeaways from the lively conversation.
Parents vs. social media companies
One of Haidt’s biggest concerns about the current situation Parenthood And social media is that “we overprotect our children in the real world and underprotect them online,” he said. “And both of these steps are mistakes. They are bad for development.” That’s why he is is committed to it no smartphones before high school, no social media before 16, no phones in schools, and more unsupervised play and independence in childhood.
That’s why, Harry said: “It’s very easy for social media companies to point the finger at parents and say, ‘Well, you know, that’s on you.’ It’s because of your upbringing.’”
But that’s an argument Haidt rejects.
“If there were some parents who got it wrong, and most parents got it right, then I would be very open to that argument,” he said. “But once kids have a phone and social media, the rest of family life becomes a battle over screen time. And that happens everywhere. This happens in Silicon Valleywhere the parents know what’s going on.”
Why do we give our 10 year olds a smartphone? “The main reason,” Haidt said, “is that everyone else did it.” We don’t want our daughter to be the only one left out. I am facing this situation now because my 14 year old daughter is in the process Snapchat. So the tech companies get us into trouble and then try to blame us for what they did.” For this reason, he is also a proponent of collective action, or a coalition of parents agreeing to buy smartphones to postpone for their children.
What about smartphones from a security perspective?
As part of his insight sessions, Harry said he has spoken to parents who say they give their children phones from a young age to keep them safe.
“It’s a double-edged sword,” he said. “You want them to have their phone at school in case of an emergency, but once you have your phone, like every child, even if you’re told not to download this app, kids have a way around it .”
However, Haidt does not believe the security argument. “If you want to give your child a phone so they can call you if something goes wrong, that’s great. Give them a phone. Just don’t give them a supercomputer connected to everyone in the world… They don’t need that. Millennials had flip phones. They spent their adolescence using flip phones to call, text, and meet each other. It went well.”
Generation Z, on the other hand, “went through puberty with a supercomputer that blocked out almost everything else in life,” he said. “Everything is going back: a lot less time with friends, a lot less sunlight, a lot fewer books, a lot fewer hobbies. You take almost everything from your childhood with you. They replace it with this and a whole bunch of millions of short videos. It’s not a great childhood.”
The “myth” of social media as a lifeline
Prince Harry then expressed the idea that social media has a positive – and even life-saving – side.
“We know that, to a large extent, social media provides an opportunity and an additional resource for children who may not feel comfortable coming to us to talk about their problems, their problems and their concerns,” said he. “Online kids will feel more connected to complete strangers on social media. As a parent, how do you know your child is using social media well?”
Haidt said it’s “one of Meta’s favorite talking points” that “social media is a lifeline for LGBTQ kids, for kids from marginalized communities. And that’s just not true.”
What’s true, he said, is that “the Internet was great for them.” The Internet solved all of these problems in the ’90s. If you’re a gay kid and you’re not with anyone in a rural part of America or England, the internet was great. You could find information, you could find people like you and you could communicate.” But social media, Haidt emphasized, had changed all that.
“It’s not just about me connecting with you anymore,” he said. “It’s now about an algorithm-driven news feed that pushes content to you. That’s not what they need. If you have a particular interest, you can find it below Google. You don’t need an algorithm to feed you things.
So it’s “a myth,” he said Instagram and TikTok are lifelines. “In my opinion, the research is very clear: When children have a best friend or, above all, a small group [of friends]they are generally doing well. When children don’t have a close friend or group, they are much less likely to thrive. If you have 300 connections, you don’t have time for anyone.”
More on mental health: