How you can save yourself from smartphone addiction

The problem is more serious with young people. The average age of buying a smartphone is now 10 years old, and as this average age decreases, the effects increase. In response to this trend, two major shareholders at the Apple California pension fund, CalSTRS and the JANA Partners group are asking Apple to build money for children and young people in her products. In an open letter sent to the board, they argue that there is no point in giving a child or teenager, “the same phone as a 40-year-old”: The average American teen using a smartphone gets his first phone at the age of 10 and spends over 4.5 hours a day (excluding text and conversation). 78% of teenagers check their phones at least one hour and 50% report feeling “dependent” on their phones.

It would be foolish to say that this level of use by children whose brains are still developing does not have at least any impact, or that the creator of such a powerful product has no role, to help parents make sure that the product is being used optimisticly.

[JANA Partners] Of course, such involvement and concern by Apple would be ideal. In a perfect world, Apple (as well as other technology giants, such as Facebook and Google), would take responsibility for the dangerous nature of their technology addiction. But is this a case in which we can seek higher standards from industry giants like Apple?

Can we search for them so that they can practically save us from themselves? Or is it similar to the request that McDonald's offer only organic chickens in child packs? Very often, smartphone users forget that the virtual world that is presented to them through their equipment is a new and relatively unknown territory; most of us grew up without these devices in our homes.

The “Gen” (so named by Jean Twenge in its new book on young people and technology) is the first group growing with such technology. And now that we're seeing the impact it has on their emotional, intellectual, and physical lives, we have to adapt our habits and practices according to circumstances. We should be just as careful about the dangers of technology as we are aware of its many gifts.

Ironically, many leaders of Silicon Valley seem to understand potential risks better than the rest of us. Steve Jobs did not allow his children to use iPad, and he told New York Times journalist Nick Bilton in 2010 that he limited the technology his children used at home. Evan Weilliams, founder of Twitter and Medium, refused to give his sons an iPad.

In his new book Irresistable, Professor and author Adam Alter says: “It looks like people who produce technology products are following the basic rules of drug dealers: Never get high on your own” product. But, of course, technology giants usually do not share that care with others.

Apple Store sells a number of apps designed for babies and babies; devices like Apple Watch encourage us to be constantly connected. While televisions are now often equipped with parental controls, we have not yet seen similar features inflated in our mobile devices.

To ask Apple to help children and adults get away from their products or, better yet, to prevent them from becoming addicted to smartphones is to ask them to make the less delicious Chick-files so that customers can buy less. This doesn't look like a good thing for business unless Apple probably considers the long-term benefits of cultivating the trust and loyalty of consumers-Princes, today and future.

The tension between the greater standards of a company and ethical considerations, as well as their ability to benefit through our dependence and inadequacy, will always be in conflict. Better companies are aware of this tension, and try to consider more than profit in setting their goals and aspirations.

But no business will ever serve as a guardian angel, demanding more of us than we ask of ourselves. For this reason, while we have to seek higher standards and consciences from remarkable technology companies, we have to look at our homes to fight the widespread influence of smartphones.

Sherry Turkle offers many ideas about fighting technological obsession in her book “Reclaying Conversion”, as does Alter in the book “Irresistable”. The two authors recommend the extraction and definition of physical spaces called them “sacred spaces” in which technology devices should not be.

Turkle's research shows that just having a smartphone can literally hinder conversation and connection that makes it suggest we hide our equipment in class, at the dining table, or when we drink coffee with a friend.

Such measures are not only for our benefit: They also help to encourage those around us. The Ggen generation, for which Twenge, is concerned about Apple's investors, needs the influence and care of parents, teachers and peers to leave behind these customs and set up new daily rhythms. Apple may be able to help if you want. But in the end, we are the real responsibilities. / The Week é The world..