Colman Noctor: Technology is not good or bad — it’s both

Creating a healthy relationship with technology depends on the temperament of the child

To create good technological relationships, we need to support users from early childhood so they become critical consumers of technology and make choices that work for them rather than the tech companies. Picture: iStock 

It's hard to believe that in 2005 'Google' wasn't a verb, and in 2009 the iPhone 4 had yet to be launched. 

There is no doubt we have become more adept at using technological applications and platforms, such as Instagram, Twitter and Snapchat, over the past decade. 

My mother is in her 70s and she watches Mass online and uses GiFs on WhatsApp. But I fear the gap in our understanding of these technologies is moving at a much slower pace than their development.

Last week, I was involved in several virtual events to mark Safer Internet Week. The interest in this topic is huge and perhaps an indication of how much parents struggle with their children's relationship with technology.

The major questions from parents have not changed in recent years and predictably involve two themes: 'What age should a child be given a smartphone?' and 'How much screen time is appropriate for a child or teenager?' Although these are reasonable questions, they are unanswerable. As technology usage becomes more pervasive, it has become a much more nuanced subject than these questions reflect.

I would like to be able to say, X is the exact age when a child is ready to negotiate the online world and Y is the optimal amount of time on screen a child should spend to maximise the benefits and minimise negative impacts of their usage. But when describing the effect of anything on our mental wellbeing, neatness and clarity are often not possible.

It is also not possible to determine whether technology is 'good' or 'bad'. Firstly, because it has not been around long enough to define the long-term impact of technology on our mental health, and secondly, because it is almost impossible to separate it from other parts of our lives, it is difficult to make substantial 'cause and effect' claims.

The inconvenient truth is that technology is not good or bad, it's both. And, despite our desire for black and white answers, the world of technology is decidedly grey. Technology has become so embedded into our lives, arguments about offline and online separation have become moot points.

The internet has become too big to control, and attempts to regulate that space are futile. While we would all like to see the development of a safer internet, my experience over the last decade suggests this is unlikely. Anonymity is one of the main attractions to the space, so the mandatory introduction of identity markers and age verification would risk the cyberworld losing its appeal. There is also a lack of will, on behalf of technology companies, to make the online space safer as they believe the absence of regulation is part of the attraction of the internet.

In Ireland, we are still drawing up a job description for a digital safety commissioner, while the metaverse is developing more advanced virtual reality and immersive technologies. This indicates how far behind the curve we are in terms of monitoring the impact on children and adult populations.

Focus on quality, not quantity 

'Time spent' online should not be the focus, we need to concentrate on 'time well spent'. We don't judge children's diets by the amount of time they spend at the kitchen table and we don't measure the health of their diet by how long it takes them to eat their food. We strive for a healthy balanced diet of fruit, vegetables, and other nutrients, bar the odd bar of chocolate or a trip to McDonald's. Nobody would suggest we should expect children to have a life without ice cream, but we wouldn't encourage them to have ice cream for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

Not all children are the same. Some can regulate their sweet tooth and enjoy an apple from time to time, whereas others need a lock on the treat press because they are poor self-regulators and would eat junk food until they feel ill.

The approach to creating a healthy relationship with food depends on the child's temperament, and the same applies to technology. We don't say that at 13 years of age, all children can take full control of their dietary choices. If we did, there could be teenagers existing on a diet of Taytos and Weetabix. 

So why would we say the same about children's technological diets? Despite technology companies deciding we should buy our children smartphones for their Confirmation or before they start secondary school, this assumed readiness is an urban myth.

A child's age is not a reliable indicator of their ability to negotiate the online environment. We also cannot over-rely on parental control apps to do the parenting work. Preparing a child for the online world involves preparing the child, not the online world. 

'There is no app for your lap', and so conversations that prepare your child to self-regulate are more effective than a series of parental control restrictions. It is better to teach your child to self-regulate their diet than to have to keep the lock on the treat press.

The approach to technology needs to be the same as our approach to food. A balanced diet of good technology uses, such as using screens for homework assignments combined with time for the less-productive activities such as watching a screaming YouTuber play a video game.

Each child is different 

The key is that the parent needs to tailor the technology diet to the child. Those who are more likely to make sensible choices and self-regulate may require far less surveillance than those who have difficulty with self-regulation. This characteristic is not related to arbitrary concepts like a child's age but their vulnerability.

There are many 11-year-olds who, if given the responsibility, would be able to self-select a balanced diet of nutrition, whereas there are 17-year-olds who would make poor decisions when it comes to dietary choices. Therefore, we need to move the emphasis from regulating content to regulating desire. That's not to suggest continued efforts to control harmful content, such as sex abuse, hate speeches, or racism, should not continue, but a parallel process to improve our media literacy and education around self-regulation needs to occur alongside it.

Even if you cleaned up the internet and removed all harmful content, you would still have children who would spend nine hours on YouTube watching cats on skateboards. This is not illegal or inappropriate but it's not a good use of their time.

Improving our relationships with technology needs to focus on the humans, not the machines. The 'user' is the critical variable, and to create good technological relationships, we need to support users from early childhood so they become critical consumers of technology and make choices that work for them rather than the tech companies.

This is not just an issue of kids spending too much time on their screens — as adults, we have to lead by example. If you are saying 'get off YouTube' while scrolling through your Instagram, it's no different to saying, 'eat your porridge' while you munch on a packet of crisps. 

So, like creating healthy relationships with food, when it comes to helping children have healthy relationships with technology, we have a key role in this too.