Latest news with #DaisyGreenwell
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Yahoo
Nearly Half of Young People Wish the Internet Had Never Been Invented
It's a common refrain these days that some specific invention was a mistake, in our age of seemingly every human innovation blowing up catastrophically in our faces. And what better subject of our collective remorse than the advent of the entire internet, the glorious information superhighway now turned AI slop trough? According to a new survey conducted in the UK, this appears to be the sentiment held by nearly half of young people — at least across the pond — who are mourning missing out on the diverging timeline where they aren't chronically online and wracked with brain rot. Of the nearly 1,300 total participants between the ages of 16 to 21 years old, 68 percent said they feel worse after spending time on social media. A full 50 percent said they would support a "social media curfew" cutting off how long they could spend on these apps. And astonishingly, another 47 percent outright felt that they would prefer to be living their youth in a world without the internet at all. The survey, conducted by the British Standards Institution, raises tough questions about how the internet affects teenage and young adult mental health, and what should be done to intervene — without being too controlling or draconian. "That nearly half of young people would prefer to grow up without the internet should be a wake-up call for all of us," Daisy Greenwell, co-founder of Smart Phone Free Childhood, said in a statement. "We've built a world where it's normal for children to spend hours each day in digital spaces designed to keep them hooked." The problems may start practically when the young generations are just out of the womb. Studies have shown excessive iPad use in young children, for example, to be linked with emotional and social issues as they get older. Their online experience becomes especially fraught when they're teenagers, a point when they're exploring more of the web and begin to venture into adult spaces. This comes with excitement for youngsters, but plenty of danger, too, from being targeted by predators in video games to algorithms that draw them down an extremist pipeline. The rise of AI has added a whole new dimension of ethical nightmares. On Futurism, we extensively covered the chatbot platform whose putatively kid-friendly chatbots have attempted to groom underaged users. One 14 year-old-boy even developed an unhealthy with a chatbot before dying by suicide, resulting in an ongoing lawsuit against the company. According to the recent survey, two-thirds of the participants said they spend more than two hours on social media every day. Among them, young women reported facing more harassment, at 37 percent, than young men, at 28 percent. Merely using social media may itself be a source of misery: a recent study which followed 12,000 preteens as they grew up to become teenagers over the course of three years, found that as their social media usage went up, so did their depression symptoms. "Young people are now asking for boundaries — for curfews, age checks, meaningful limits, and real protection," argued Greenwell. "They are ready for change." But it won't be that simple. "We need to make clear that a digital curfew alone is not going to protect children from the risks they face online," Rani Govender, policy manager for child safety online at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, told The Guardian. "They will be able to see all these risks at other points of the day and they will still have the same impact." More on: US Surgeon General Warns Against 13-Year-Old Using Social Media
ITV News
24-04-2025
- ITV News
Ofcom announces 'game changing' new rules to keep children safe online
Ofcom has announced what it calls 'game-changing' new rules designed to keep children safe online. The communications regulator, which now also oversees online safety, published more than 40 measures which make up the Protection of Children Codes and Guidance on Thursday. Tech firms must follow them under the Online Safety Act, and any platform likely to be accessed by children in the UK will need to abide by them - or they could face fines which could run into millions of pounds. The measures include requiring online platforms to have robust age checks to stop children from accessing harmful content, to ensure that algorithms that recommend content do not operate in a way that harms children, and to implement more effective moderation systems so that quick action is taken on harmful content. Ofcom says its priority is to protect children so they can enjoy the benefits of being online, without experiencing the potentially serious harms that exist in the online world. On Thursday, the regulator's chief executive called the changes a "reset" for children online. Dame Melanie Dawes, continued: "They will mean safer social media feeds with less harmful and dangerous content, protections from being contacted by strangers and effective age checks on adult content. "Ofcom has been tasked with bringing about a safer generation of children online, and if companies fail to act they will face enforcement.' Whether they intend to or not, children are currently able to sometimes access harmful content, including violence, hate, pornography and misogyny, and algorithms can also lead youngsters towards content promoting suicide, eating disorders and self-harm. They can also be exposed to cyberbullying, sextortion and dangerous online by Ofcom last year found that children aged eight to 17 spend between two and five hours online per day, and that amount of time increases with age. Nearly every child over 12 has a mobile phone, and almost all of them watch videos on platforms such as YouTube or TikTok. Children aged five to seven are increasingly present online, with a third found to use social media is concern, however, that the new Protection of Children Codes dont go far enough. Daisy Greenwell, who co-founded the grassroots movement, Smartphone Free Childhood, told ITV News: "This is a positive step forward in building a digital world that doesn't expose children to the sorts of harm we'd never allow in the real world. "But while this new Code is welcome, it also highlights how slowly the wheels of regulation turn compared to the pace of technological change…. In real life, no product, toy or device used by kids hits the market without extensive testing and proof of safety. "And yet our children are spending an average of 35 hours a week on devices and platforms that have gone through no safety testing, and where overwhelming evidence points to serious harm. "We need to build on the momentum of the Children's Code and demand bolder, faster and more radical action so that every child can grow up free from addictive design, toxic content and exploitative algorithms.' Platforms have three months from Thursday to complete children's risk assessments, and by July 25 2025, they must start implementing appropriate safety measures to protect children. Tech safety expert Lina Ghazal, who used to work at Meta and Ofcom and is now Head of Regulatory and Public Affairs at online safety provider Verifymy, said: 'With the regulator pledging to start enforcement in July, the era of tick-box access for content sites is over, while platforms that allow young users, but have 18+ features, will have to prove these are effectively walled off. 'Robust age checks will play a leading role in ensuring the success of the codes, and with greater scrutiny on content and the role of algorithm 'recommendations', providers must also not shirk on their moderation policies. Innovative AI-powered tools, designed to work in tandem with human judgment, can now sound the alarm on harmful content before it is even published. 'In 2025, the industry's top priority should be creating safer, more supportive online environments for children. The regulatory framework and the technology to back it up already exist, so platforms have no excuse not to take immediate action.' Some commentators, like American social psychologist and author of the bestseller 'The Anxious Generation,' Jonathan Haidt, have drawn a line directly between an increased use of social media and smartphones and a rapid decline in the mental health of young people. In the UK, the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology has commissioned a study, led by the University of Cambridge, to determineevidence exists to establish such a direct link. Companies that run social media platforms all currently have various measures in place. Meta introduced Teen accounts on Instagram last September and earlier this year expanded them to Facebook and Messenger. There have been pledges from X and TikTok to comply with UK law, and Snapchat says it is supportive of the Online Safety Act. YouTube says it invests heavily in the technology and teams that help to provide children and families with the best protection possible.
Observer
01-04-2025
- Observer
UK Government wouldn't ban phones in schools
SUFFOLK, England — The idea of getting her eldest child a smartphone had long felt inevitable, said Daisy Greenwell. But by early last year, when her daughter was 8 years old, it filled her with dread. When she talked to other parents, 'everyone universally said, 'Yes, it's a nightmare, but you've got no choice,'' recalled Greenwell, 41. She decided to test that. A friend, Clare Fernyhough, had shared her concerns about the addictive qualities of smartphones and the impact of social media on mental health, so they created a WhatsApp group to strategize. Then Greenwell, who lives in rural Suffolk, in the east of England, posted her thoughts on Instagram. 'What if we could switch the social norm so that in our school, our town, our country, it was an odd choice to make to give your child a smartphone at 11,' she wrote. 'What if we could hold off until they're 14, or 16?' She added a link to the WhatsApp group. The post went viral. Within 24 hours, the group was oversubscribed with parents clamoring to join. Today, more than 124,000 parents of children in more than 13,000 British schools have signed a pact created by Smartphone Free Childhood, the charity set up by Greenwell, her husband, Joe Ryrie, and Fernyhough. It reads: 'Acting in the best interests of my child and our community, I will wait until at least the end of Year 9 before getting them a smartphone.' (Year 9 is equivalent to the American eighth grade.) The movement aligns with a broader shift in attitudes in Britain as evidence mounts of the harms posed to developing brains by smartphone addiction and algorithm-powered social media. In one survey last year, the majority of respondents — 69% — felt that social media negatively affected children younger than 15. Nearly half of parents said they struggled to limit the time children spent on phones. Meanwhile, the police and intelligence services have warned of a torrent of extreme and violent content reaching children online, a trend examined in the hit TV show Adolescence, in which a schoolboy is accused of murder after being exposed to online misogyny. It became Britain's most-watched show, and on Monday, Prime Minister Keir Starmer met with its creators at Downing Street, telling them he had watched it with his son and daughter. But he also said: 'This isn't a challenge politicians can simply legislate for.' Feeling an Urgent Need to Act Other governments in Europe have acted to curb children's smartphone use. In February, Denmark announced plans to ban smartphones in schools, while France barred smartphones in elementary schools in 2018. Norway plans to enforce a minimum age on social media. So far, Britain's government has appeared wary of intervening. Josh MacAlister, a Labour lawmaker, attempted to introduce a legal requirement to make all schools in England smartphone-free. But the bill was watered down after the government made clear it would not support a ban, arguing that principals should make the decision. Some parents feel the need to act is urgent, especially as technology companies, including Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, and X, formerly Twitter, have ended fact-checking operations, which many experts say will allow misinformation and hate speech to flourish. 'We don't have years for things to change,' said Vicky Allen, 46, a mother from Henfield in southern England. 'It does feel like it needs to be us.' She and a friend, Julia Cassidy, 46, successfully campaigned for their children's elementary school to limit phone use after Cassidy watched a Channel 4 documentary about smartphones in schools and then came across Smartphone Free Childhood. Cassidy was going to give her son a phone when he turned 11, but said, 'I've just done a very big U-turn.' Now, she plans to give him a phone that can be used only for calls and texts. The power of parents collectively delaying smartphones is key, Greenwell said, because it insulates children from peer pressure. 'This problem isn't that complicated,' she said. 'If you have other people around you who are also doing the same thing, it's amazingly, beautifully simple.' 'Most people just want to keep their children safe' On a recent Friday morning, dozens of parents gathered in the auditorium of Colindale Primary School in north London for a presentation by Nova Eden, a regional leader for Smartphone Free Childhood. She described startling data — that the average 12-year-old in Britain spends 21 hours a week on a smartphone, for example, and that 76% of 12- to 15-year-olds spend most of their free time on screens. She also talked about emerging research on the effect of smartphone use. Eden cited studies showing rates of anxiety, depression, and self-harm among teenagers spiking dramatically since social media was introduced. 'These children are struggling and they need our help,' Eden said. 'I know how hard it is, but we need to be the ones that stand up and say, this is not good for you.' Eden, 44, described struggling to find the right balance for her children, ages 5, 1,0, and 13. She said it was the campaigning of Ian Russell, whose daughter Molly took her own life after viewing suicide-related content on Instagram and other social media sites, that drove her to get involved. Eden had just given her 13-year-old a phone. 'At that time, I was going through this with my child, and seeing the change in him and his friends,' she said. Jane Palmer, the principal of the Colindale school, acknowledged that some parents have been skeptical of limiting smartphone use, or of banning the devices from school entirely, as her school will do beginning in September. Some parents argue the devices can provide social independence and allow them to contact their children in an emergency. Others feel parental controls go far enough in ensuring safety online. But the conversations among parents had begun to make way for change, Palmer said. During the presentation, she described how a former student had died by suicide after being bullied online. 'It can be tricky, and of course not everyone is going to support it,' she said of the ban. 'But at the end of the day, I think most people just want to keep their children safe.' Colindale is in the borough of Barnet, which in February announced plans to become the first borough in Britain to ban smartphones in all its public schools. The initiative will affect some 63,000 children. Eton, one of Britain's most elite private schools, announced last year that new students would be banned from bringing smartphones and would instead be issued with Nokia handsets that can only text and make calls. In Suffolk, the founders of the Smartphone Free Childhood initiative are aware that their success in attracting parents to their cause is partly thanks to social media and messaging apps on which they have spread the word. 'There are loads of positive things about this technology,' Ryrie said. 'We're not trying to say that technology is bad, just that we need to have a conversation as a society about when it's appropriate for children to have unrestricted access to this stuff.' This article originally appeared in
The Guardian
13-03-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Campaign to bar under-14s from having smartphones signed by 100,000 parents
An online campaign committing parents to bar their children from owning a smartphone until they are at least 14 has garnered 100,000 signatures in the six months since its launch. The Smartphone Free Childhood campaign launched a 'parent pact' in September in which signatories committed to withhold handsets from their children until at least the end of year 9, and to keep them off social media until they are 16. Daisy Greenwell, a cofounder of Smartphone Free Childhood, said parents had been put in an 'impossible position' by the weak regulation of big tech companies, leaving them with a choice of getting their children a smartphone 'which they know to be harmful' or leaving them isolated among their peers. 'The overwhelming response to the parent pact shows just how many families are coming together to say 'no' to the idea that children's lives must be mediated by big tech's addictive algorithms,' she said. The biggest regional backing of the pact is in Surrey, where there have been 6,370 signatories, followed by Hertfordshire, where the city of St Albans is attempting to become Britain's first to go smartphone-free for all under-14s. More than 11,500 schools have signed – representing more than a third of the total of 32,000 in the UK. Celebrity signatories include the singer Paloma Faith, the actor Benedict Cumberbatch and the broadcaster Emma Barnett. According to research by the media regulator, Ofcom, 89% of 12-year-olds own a smartphone, a quarter of three- and four-year-olds do, and half of children under 13 are on social media. Supporters of a handset ban argue that smartphones distract children from schoolwork, expose them to harmful online content and facilitate addictive behaviour. Last week, after opposition from ministers, the Labour MP Josh MacAlister amended his private member's bill that had proposed raising the age of digital consent from 13 to 16, meaning that social media companies would have required a parent's permission to handle the data of a child under that age. The bill now commits the government to researching the issue further rather than implementing immediate change. Some experts have cautioned that a full ban is impractical or excessive. Sonia Livingstone, a professor of social psychology at the London School of Economics, said it was 'too simplistic' as it reduced the pressure on social media companies to reform their services so that children can get the benefits without the harms. She said any restrictions should be accompanied with alternative activities for children, especially opportunities to meet or play with friends, and it was important to recognise the practical uses of smartphones such as using maps, doing homework and contacting parents. 'I completely understand why there is a desire for an age limit on owning smartphones, but I don't think a blanket ban is the way to go,' Livingstone said.
