Smart Phones.

[Annie Bynnol]

   "Ban them". "fine them", age restrictions", "legislation", "government enforcement " cry out a generation who sat their children in front of televisions and videos for hours on end while they sat watching soaps in another room.  Smartphones etc allows for greater opportunities to learn, experience and interact. Technology changes and a parent needs set an example of appropriate use as well as setting boundaries as they have always done.    

[El Cid]

1 hour ago, Annie Bynnol said:

   "Ban them". "fine them", age restrictions", "legislation", "government enforcement " cry out a generation who sat their children in front of televisions and videos for hours on end while they sat watching soaps in another room.  Smartphones etc allows for greater opportunities to learn, experience and interact. Technology changes and a parent needs set an example of appropriate use as well as setting boundaries as they have always done.    

Which is why its so difficult, adults and children(modern life) cannot function without tech, but some of the apps are not helpful to a childs development - if over-used.

[Baron99]

21 hours ago, Al Bundy said:

Indeed.

 

If that's the case then maybe children should be supplied with the old phones that do not have access to the internet.

 

This is similar to what the mother of murdered Brianna Ghey wants to brought in via legislation.   Mobiles specifically designed for those under the age of 16.  Basically a smartphone that allows no access to any age prohibited websites, including the likes of Facebook, TikToc, etc & technology in the mobile that is link to the parents' mobiles so that they can check what what sites their children are logging into. 

 

If the parents are worried about their children & want them to be able to contact them in an emergency, you don't need a smartphone, a standard, cheap mobile with no Internet access will meet the criteria. 

 

At the end of the day it's the parents who are signing the mobile contracts not the pre-teens.   

[ECCOnoob]

3 hours ago, Baron99 said:

This is similar to what the mother of murdered Brianna Ghey wants to brought in via legislation.   Mobiles specifically designed for those under the age of 16.  Basically a smartphone that allows no access to any age prohibited websites, including the likes of Facebook, TikToc, etc & technology in the mobile that is link to the parents' mobiles so that they can check what what sites their children are logging into. 

 

If the parents are worried about their children & want them to be able to contact them in an emergency, you don't need a smartphone, a standard, cheap mobile with no Internet access will meet the criteria. 

 

At the end of the day it's the parents who are signing the mobile contracts not the pre-teens.   

But a lot of this seems to stem from parents demanding legislation and finger pointing  towards the actual companies rather than taking self-responsibility for their own failures. 

 

Many of the barriers on age restricting access or accessing harmful content or 'accidently' making some ludicrous purchases on mummy's credit card 'without knowledge' of the parents.... Can all get set at the click of a button if the actual parents took responsibility to set the phones up properly, set the parent called controls, put data blocks on, set passwords and took the perfectly sensible step not to have their credit card information stored on a phone being given to their kid!   All of those security functions exist and have for at least two decades if mummy and daddy actually bother to read the instructions and did a bit of research before handing a device to their little Britney or Dwayne. 

 

A recent BBC article highlighted issues with multiple social media companies (who all have at least a 13 or above age minimum) being blamed for having many kids underage on their services.  There were the sorts of usual crying about why are the companies not doing more to protect children and on about how kids signing up were blatantly lying about their age, but nobody seemed to be asking the question about what the hell the parents were doing.   Why were the parents not checking their phones or even stopping the apps being download in the first place.

 

As others have said, it's not the children walking to a shop buying these devices.  The device is nothing more than a tool.  It can be as useful, useless, necessary, unnecessary, perfectly safe or dangerous as the fleshy end user wants to make it.

[Anna B]

I would imagine (but don't know) that a smart phone for a 7 year old would be very different from an adult smart phone. What 7 year old wants a small hand held black box that only does grown up things?

 

I imagine it to be more colourful and accident proof than the adult version, perhaps with a simple phone that can be restricted by the parents to only allow family phone calls etc.

I also see it having a mixture of fun and educational games, fun facts, a mixture of music and songs, and information / podcasts, suitable to the age group, plus a creative space for drawing, designing, and, well, creating.

Schools have something called the Intranet which is a child friendly version of the internet, and any number of age appropriate learning games.

 

4 year old Tots in reception class start using computers almost from day 1 as a learning activity. I would imagine smart phones could be built to do the same.

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

I would imagine (but don't know) that a smart phone for a 7 year old would be very different from an adult smart phone. What 7 year old wants a small hand held black box that only does grown up things?

 

I imagine it to be more colourful and accident proof than the adult version, perhaps with a simple phone that can be restricted by the parents to only allow family phone calls etc.

I also see it having a mixture of fun and educational games, fun facts, a mixture of music and songs, and information / podcasts, suitable to the age group, plus a creative space for drawing, designing, and, well, creating.

Schools have something called the Intranet which is a child friendly version of the internet, and any number of age appropriate learning games.

 

4 year old Tots in reception class start using computers almost from day 1 as a learning activity. I would imagine smart phones could be built to do the same.

What adult does?   that's why there are a verity of apps used plenty by grown adults as well as kids which make fart noises, play games with cartoon birds blowing up and create selfies with silly distorted characterises or animated filters on top.  That's why people can get smartphone covers/cases/decoration in anything from barbie pink, to dinosaur green to furry dice or little jewelled trinkets hanging off them. 

 

The device is just a tool.   Like I said earlier kids shouldn't need a 'special phone' all of the things you mention above are already available.  Parents can choose to download and/or block any app they choose.  They dont need a bespoke 'intranet' because facility already exists to make internet access child friendly.   Nearly all Internet Service Providers have had such facilities for decades and schools do it all the time. 

 

What parents need to do is pull their heads out of their backsides and actually take responsibility to understand the tech, set it up properly and continually monitor it before they give it to their child.   I can guarantee having two tier types of mobile phones will not solve the issue.  Kids are not stupid.  If one phone is a mocked as a toy and the other is deem a 'proper phone' its obvious what peer pressure and bullying will follow.   

[Baron99]

55 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

What adult does?   that's why there are a verity of apps used plenty by grown adults as well as kids which make fart noises, play games with cartoon birds blowing up and create selfies with silly distorted characterises or animated filters on top.  That's why people can get smartphone covers/cases/decoration in anything from barbie pink, to dinosaur green to furry dice or little jewelled trinkets hanging off them. 

 

The device is just a tool.   Like I said earlier kids shouldn't need a 'special phone' all of the things you mention above are already available.  Parents can choose to download and/or block any app they choose.  They dont need a bespoke 'intranet' because facility already exists to make internet access child friendly.   Nearly all Internet Service Providers have had such facilities for decades and schools do it all the time. 

 

What parents need to do is pull their heads out of their backsides and actually take responsibility to understand the tech, set it up properly and continually monitor it before they give it to their child.   I can guarantee having two tier types of mobile phones will not solve the issue.  Kids are not stupid.  If one phone is a mocked as a toy and the other is deem a 'proper phone' its obvious what peer pressure and bullying will follow.   

I fully agree with you but I'd bet there would be a massive market for any phone manufacturer just making a mobile with limited Internet access. 

 

Having said that, the Internet is good & bad in equal proportions but from what I hear & see most days, the internet isn't the problem per se.  The main problem appears to be children with mobile phones suffering at the hands of children with mobile phones & I don't think you can put that genie back in the bottle.