There are policy statements that present themselves as great solutions and yet leave a bitter aftertaste: imposition.
It’s the “we’ve done it right for you” thing that we like so much, and that, thanks to repetition, ends up seeming like a justification for everything. When I propose to ban access to social media for under 16s, take action against the platforms’ senior management and above all Chasing the “huella of hate”, an unpleasant thought occurs to me: confuse protection with control.
And every time you get the two words too mixed up, someone else does Muriendo matando: freedom is born in the name of safety and trust is here in the name of urgency.
In this whole dichotomy, we have to admit the obvious: we have to serious problem with young people’s mental health and digital dopamine addiction. I’ve talked to confused parents who ask me desperate, and how do I recommend not watching TikTok when all my classmates are doing it? I saw young people in our streets, walking down the streets, coming, every one of them, in motion, without a single word for several minutes. It is not an invention or a moralistic trend: it is real, it is painful, and it requires serious responses.
It is for this reason that I am concerned about the temptation to attack. Ban by decree, point out the culprits of convenience, clothe them in a noble cause and put the carpet in the debate. The “theft for work” policy may sound novel, but it usually breaks down where it matters most: in the everyday lives of families. The protection of minors is indispensableYes; what I’m talking about is the method. It’s not the same thing defend que teaching. It’s not the same thing regular que control. And it’s not the same demanding responsibility que criminalize coup announcement.
Because it’s easier to promise a big ban than to build a brand that works. But democracies are degraded by the accumulation of exceptions. Exceptional skills are rarely given away. Hoy se invo a los menores; However, the same logic can be applied to other areas with the same paternalistic “it’s good for you” argument, note the famous porn passport that follows the minister of the day, you should be implanted.
I have no intention of absolving technology of your responsibility. On the contrary. Endless attention surrounds this design and users of surgical precision segments must respond to the risks it generates, especially in a vulnerable population. There are serious questions we can and must ask: parental controls activated by defect and easy to use, limits for dark patrons which are looking for enganche, informs de I can go to menores auditable by third parties, y mandatory breaks with long-term use in children and adolescents. This has to be done well. The second – the creation of an indiscriminate criminal climate – is a curtain of humor.
We should also look into the matter because we are native digital cases and have enjoyed a universe of stimuli without a map or compass. Digital education cannot be too shortup to an itinerary that can be evaluated from elementary school: critical thinking, time management, self-esteem before social comparison, basic criteria of privacy and reputation. Nothing about it is “sold” electorally. But e.g what is the difference when light is satisfied and life is fulfilled.
What worries me, ademási, is the tone in which this cruzada is communicated. There is an underlying condescension – “you don’t know, the state does” – that undermines the confidence of our young people. And without trust, it is impossible to ask for the cooperation of the families who are most likely to decide on this matter, because even if they wanted to leave it, their children do not belong to the state.
I do not deny the urgency. This is an inquiry one-sidedness. A democratic president discusses, listens, incorporates mathematics, corrects, but unfortunately it is not the case.
The protection of minors is non-negotiable. Come on we did it yes I suggest the most difficult path: protect without infantilizing, regular without controlling, exigir without demonizing. It is less noticeable. It’s slower. But it is the only way that allows us to look into the eyes of those who have been living with social values in recent years and say: Let’s protect without encerraros and guard freedom ourselves. If we do this, innovation will not die or be lost.
***Angel Niño It is the concept of innovation and entrepreneurship of the Madrid Ayuntamiento.
Leave a Reply