There is plenty of material that children lack the tools to understand and digest without trauma or ideological absorption. Most adults lack those skills too, to be fair.
There should actually be ways to choose for your children what kinds of content you would like them to have access to until they're mature enough to decide for themselves. If you want to limit it to educational content, that's up to you as a parent.
Is antisemitism radical ? Are islamists radical ? Who knows right ? Such a tough question!
Radical means favoring extreme changes. So depending on where you live and in what part of society the things you mentioned above might not be seen as radical or they might be.
I for example would have liked to not give children access to a bible too. That might be seen as radical in some christian societies...
Is heroin being illegal authoritarianism?
Crystal meth?
It is clear by now that social media are terrible for the individual, and for society. And so much more for kids.
> do we agree with this authoritarianism?
Yes? Do you agree with your kids getting blasted/manipulated by foreign content coming from an app controlled by an authoritarian country ?
Why do you want more authoritarians?
Can you really not understand why some people favor authoritarian systems? Can you not imagine that some folks just don't want think critically themselves? Live is often dull but easy if you follow along in authoritarian systems. Some people prefer that
Why do you want foreign apps made by authoritarian countries to have root access to your kids brains ?
> Why do you want more authoritarians?
> Why do people want the government to solve all problems?
I know it's 2023 and people believe "laws = authoritarianism" but come on. We decided to live in organised and hierarchical societies for a reason, and the reason isn't "I want to do whatever I want whenever I went even if it's detrimental to myself and my community"
In fact, I believe the level of laws a society has should be negotiated by its citizens. I prefer a more liberal society, but that does not mean I do not want laws.
The question to be debated is just how much power a government should have. Personally I would prefer that parents and their community determine what is right for a child to be exposed to instead of a top-down approach, but there is a lot of grey area there and must be negotiated culturally and politically.
What I do fear is that authoritarians rarely give up authority once given, and once given enough authority the populace's ability to negotiate government's role in their life democratically evaporates. Increasingly despotic leaders seek the power the government now holds.
The history of the 20th century shows this in extreme forms in the likes of Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, etc.
Especially in the case of Germany - Hilter was elected! - the people wanted his authority because he promised to fix Germany, promised to fix the morals of their society.
I see parallels in legislating morality, or the attitude that government _should_ legislate every moral or social quandary.
Anyway, I'd encourage you to steel-man your opponents ideas instead of assuming the most ridiculous, easily-defeated idea of it.
Genuine question: Are there any studies/etc showing this? If there are, why aren’t they the focus of articles like this?
My guess would be that the sample size here is small and therefore it's not a completely iron clad study. Maybe there are bigger studies out there, I don't know. This one would be easy to gainsay and/or maybe the publication doesn't think its readers respond to scientific research.
I guess this is like the early days of research showing smoking was bad. Long way to go until everyone is convinced.
That's not a bad start. Overexposure is literally giving users dementia, aka brain atrophy.
eta: if anyone was spending 4.8 hours a day playing the slots, we'd call that a serious addiction, let alone kids whose brains are still forming.