On the topic of After Babel once again, have you seen Freya India's latest article on there today, Mike? The one where the focus shifts once again to yet another big perennial "folk devil": online porn. What are your thoughts about that one? And what is the best rebuttal to her thesis?
Of course, that is not the only recent moral panic article in that vein. Please also respond to the latest ones on Melanie Hempe's Substack as well. Particular these two articles of hers. Thanks 👍
I saw that just now, and responded to it. Well said overall. The author and about 99% of the comments on that article fail to see the forest for the trees.
I've written about this. See https://mikemales.substack.com/p/the-lancets-latest-study-showing I certainly support localized rules to silence phones in venues where they would be disruptive, such as classrooms, offices, concerts, etc., but wholesale bans are both overly intrusive, even dangerous, and showing no positive results.
I am actually fine with "bell-to-bell" phone-free schools as such, on ONE condition: it must apply to EVERYONE, including teachers, staff, and administrators, period. As a safety valve, they may use it briefly in the faculty lounge or (parked) personal vehicles. After all, they wouldn't want to set a bad example and be flaming hypocrites, right?
Well said. I remember reading that. After Babel and Jon Haidt of course dismissed that landmark Lancet study as it didn't fit their narrative. And just yesterday, After Babel posted an anecdote from a teacher about how great such phone bans are. Because anecdotal evidence > statistics whenever it is convenient for them. Ugh.
As I pointed out in a comment on After Babel and my own analysis, Haidt's criticism of The Lancet study was based on his erroneous claim that its authors failed to assess schools with total cellphone bans. In fact, they did -- also showing no benefits. Haidt had promised a further comment but still has not provided one.
Amen! Very well said, Mike! Shout it from the rooftops!
SO many chronological adults really cannot see the forest for the trees, it seems. And the rank hypocrisy reaches new, stratospheric heights of evil in a gun-nut state like Texas.
Good thing the social media ban failed to pass since they missed the deadline. Unfortunately, the app store age verification bill passed, and hopefully the courts will strike it down by the time it goes into effect.
On the topic of After Babel once again, have you seen Freya India's latest article on there today, Mike? The one where the focus shifts once again to yet another big perennial "folk devil": online porn. What are your thoughts about that one? And what is the best rebuttal to her thesis?
What do you think, Mike?
I did leave a comment on her posting.
Of course, that is not the only recent moral panic article in that vein. Please also respond to the latest ones on Melanie Hempe's Substack as well. Particular these two articles of hers. Thanks 👍
https://screenstrong.substack.com/p/porn-is-chasing-your-child-heres
https://screenstrong.substack.com/p/no-child-is-immune-from-sextortion
I saw that just now, and responded to it. Well said overall. The author and about 99% of the comments on that article fail to see the forest for the trees.
Also, Mike, what are your thoughts on the trend towards requiring phone-free schools?
I've written about this. See https://mikemales.substack.com/p/the-lancets-latest-study-showing I certainly support localized rules to silence phones in venues where they would be disruptive, such as classrooms, offices, concerts, etc., but wholesale bans are both overly intrusive, even dangerous, and showing no positive results.
My comment on After Babel's latest article:
I am actually fine with "bell-to-bell" phone-free schools as such, on ONE condition: it must apply to EVERYONE, including teachers, staff, and administrators, period. As a safety valve, they may use it briefly in the faculty lounge or (parked) personal vehicles. After all, they wouldn't want to set a bad example and be flaming hypocrites, right?
Well said. I remember reading that. After Babel and Jon Haidt of course dismissed that landmark Lancet study as it didn't fit their narrative. And just yesterday, After Babel posted an anecdote from a teacher about how great such phone bans are. Because anecdotal evidence > statistics whenever it is convenient for them. Ugh.
As I pointed out in a comment on After Babel and my own analysis, Haidt's criticism of The Lancet study was based on his erroneous claim that its authors failed to assess schools with total cellphone bans. In fact, they did -- also showing no benefits. Haidt had promised a further comment but still has not provided one.
Very true indeed. They conveniently ignore anything that doesn't fit their narrative.
Amen! Very well said, Mike! Shout it from the rooftops!
SO many chronological adults really cannot see the forest for the trees, it seems. And the rank hypocrisy reaches new, stratospheric heights of evil in a gun-nut state like Texas.
Good thing the social media ban failed to pass since they missed the deadline. Unfortunately, the app store age verification bill passed, and hopefully the courts will strike it down by the time it goes into effect.