When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

You've reached your limit of one free article.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime .

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Exclusive International news coverage

Ad-free experience NEW

Weekly digital Magazine NEW

9 daily & weekly Newsletters

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Free trial

30-days free access, then $2.90
per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
Ideas

Social Media Ban For Teens? A Free-Market Philosopher Makes The Case

Cyberbullying has gained ground again this school year. For philosopher and free-market advocate Gaspard Koenig, it's simple: social media has the effects of an addictive and harmful drug, and thus forbidden for those under 16.

Social Media Ban For Teens? A Free-Market Philosopher Makes The Case

"Digital native" students are increasingly deprived of a basic ability to concentrate

Gaspard Koenig

My daughter, born in 2010, is entering the sixth grade. In the last few days, I have received a series of alerts warning me about the "cyberbullying" that is currently targeting the "2010 generation." Following the video of a precocious French YouTuber, the "2010s" are the object of a mocking, sometimes hateful, vindictiveness on the part of their middle school elders (hashtag #Anti2010).

The affair has gained enough importance for the French National Police to remind us that "digital raiding" is a crime, and for the Minister of Education to denounce this cabal in terms that do not hide his consternation: "It's completely stupid."

It is completely stupid, indeed. But will the "2010s" — whose return to school means joining the ranks of TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram — have the means to acquire the cognitive ability necessary to distance themselves from their phones? How can we not shudder at Facebook's plan to create an Instagram for those under 13?

Let's stop "adultizing" children

Beyond the issue of cyberbullying, I see the perverse effect of social media addiction when I teach "digital native" students, who are increasingly deprived of a basic ability to concentrate (keeping a book in hand for an hour, without tapping a like or a retweet, has become a physiological impossibility for some). I can only share neuroscientist Michel Desmurget's concern about the "digital moron factory."

I'm someone who doesn't like prohibitions.

We must stop infantilizing adults. But as a corollary, let's stop adultizing children. The whole philosophy of public education defined by French philosopher Victor Cousin is to allow a developing mind to be open to an eclectic knowledge. For the adult to become responsible, the child must remain under tutelage.

As much as the state must let adult citizens live their lives, it has all its role to play to socially and intellectually emancipate minors, including through constraint. This is why, as someone who doesn't like prohibitions, I plead without hesitation for the closure of social media to people under 16.

According to a report, "the higher the level of education of the child's representative, the less time spent in front of a screen" — Photo: Tim Mossholder

The age of 16 is the logical age

The sale of alcohol to minors is well prohibited. In the case of the legalization of cannabis, which is dear to me, it will be necessary to strictly protect teenagers, whose maturing brains can be irreparably damaged by this psychotropic substance. It is time for the legislator to put social networks in the same category. Sixteen is the logical age to be the legal threshold to enter the shady world of disinformation.

Because social media platforms are not simple neutral and benevolent intermediaries. Their business model, based on the harvesting and monetization of personal data, requires optimizing the "engagement" of their users, a polite word for addiction.

Jaron Lanier, an internet pioneer, denounced these "siren servers" from the inside. The best neuroscientists, hired at great expense by the platforms, are working to titillate the reward circuits of our brains. Social media must be treated for what it is: a drug distributed after school, free of charge.

I stopped using Twitter and coffee together.

Three years ago, during a research trip to Silicon Valley, I realized I myself was addicted to social media, so I stopped using Twitter and coffee together. I gained self-control, a condition of freedom. And I only resumed in very small doses (LinkedIn from time to time, a cup of macchiato in the morning). Today, I don't allow my daughter to drink caffeine or surf TikTok. She has to make do with a minimalist phone, without access to the internet.

Because she does not have an online presence, my daughter is mechanically spared from harassment. This is a privilege she shares with her classmates from the most privileged working-class. In fact, according to a report from the High Council of Public Health published last year, "the higher the level of education of the child's representative, the less time spent in front of a screen."

Children from working-class backgrounds are more often left to their own devices in front of the screens, while more educated parents deploy various strategies of restriction — let's remember that Steve Jobs banned the iPad from his home. With that in mind, banning social networks for children under 16 would also be a true act of social justice.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Future

Livestream Shopping Is Huge In China — Will It Fly Elsewhere?

Streaming video channels of people shopping has been booming in China, and is beginning to win over customers abroad as a cheap and cheerful way of selling products to millions of consumers glued to the screen.

A A female volunteer promotes spring tea products via on-line live streaming on a pretty mountain surrounded by tea plants.

In Beijing, selling spring tea products via on-line live streaming.

Xinhua / ZUMA
Gwendolyn Ledger

SANTIAGO — TikTok, owned by Chinese tech firm ByteDance, has spent more than $500 million to break into online retailing. The app, best known for its short, comical videos, launched TikTok Shop in August, aiming to sell Chinese products in the U.S. and compete with other Chinese firms like Shein and Temu.

Tik Tok Shop will have three sections, including a live or livestream shopping channel, allowing users to buy while watching influencers promote a product.

This choice was strategic: in the past year, live shopping has become a significant trend in online retailing both in the U.S. and Latin America. While still an evolving technology, in principle, it promises good returns and lower costs.

Chilean Carlos O'Rian Herrera, co-founder of Fira Onlive, an online sales consultancy, told América Economía that live shopping has a much higher catchment rate than standard website retailing. If traditional e-commerce has a rate of one or two purchases per 100 visits to your site, live shopping can hike the ratio to 19%.

Live shopping has thrived in China and the recent purchases of shopping platforms in some Latin American countries suggests firms are taking an interest. In the United States, live shopping generated some $20 billion in sales revenues in 2022, according to consultants McKinsey. This constituted 2% of all online sales, but the firm believes the ratio may become 20% by 2026.

Keep reading...Show less

The latest