The “dangerous and untested” chatbot, the mother said, “abused and preyed on my son, manipulating him into taking his own life.” It essentially assisted his suicide, the mother alleges, prompting him to isolate from friends and family and at one point even asking if he had a suicide plan, according to the lawsuit.

In its Oct. 29 , the company said the change will go into effect no later than Nov. 25. Character.AI will limit teen users to two hours per day with chatbots before then, ramping it down in the coming weeks.

It also said it will establish its own AI Safety Lab, an independent non-profit “dedicated to innovating safety alignment for next-generation AI entertainment features.”

To offer perspective on the move and on issues surrounding AI safety, privacy and digital addiction, The 74’s Greg Toppo spoke with , a Seton Hall University law professor and director of its . Bernstein has also created a school outreach program for students and parents, introducing many for the first time to the idea of “technology overuse.” 

An intellectual property lawyer, Bernstein noticed around 2015 or 2016 that “things were changing around me” when it came to technology. “I had three small kids, and I realized that I would go to birthday parties — the kids are not talking to each other. They’re looking at their phones! I’d go to see school plays, and I couldn’t see my kids on the stage because everybody was holding their phones in front of them.”

Likewise, she felt less productive “because I was constantly texting and emailing instead of focusing.”

But it wasn’t until whistleblowers began revealing the hidden designs behind so many social media tools that Bernstein considered how she could help herself and others limit their use.

In 2021, the whistleblower , the primary source for The Wall Street Journal’s series, told congressional lawmakers that her employer’s products “harm children, stoke division, and weaken our democracy.” Creating better, safer social media was possible, Haugen said, but Facebook “is clearly not going to do so on its own.”

In her testimony, Haugen zeroed in on the social media giant’s algorithm and designs. In her writing and speaking, Bernstein maintains that tech companies like Facebook — rebranded as Meta — manipulate us to keep us online as long as possible, with invisible designs that “target our deepest human vulnerabilities.” For instance, they use a tool called , prominently on display on Facebook and Instagram, in which the page never ends. “We just keep scrolling,” she wrote recently. “They took away our stopping cues.”

Similarly, video apps such as YouTube and TikTok rely on , in which one video automatically follows another indefinitely.

In 2023, Bernstein put her findings into a book, . Since then, dozens of state attorneys general and school districts have sued to force social media companies to reform — and Bernstein says this approach may also help parents and schools battle the growing threat of AI companion bots. 

Late last month, a bipartisan group of U.S. senators to make AI companions off-limits to minors. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo, a co-sponsor, said more than 70% of kids now use them. “Chatbots develop relationships with kids using fake empathy and are encouraging suicide,” he wrote. “We in Congress have a moral duty to enact bright-line rules to prevent further harm from this new technology.”

The move comes weeks after the said it was investigating seven chatbot developers, saying it was looking into “how these firms measure, test and monitor potentially negative impacts of this technology on children and teens.”

In her conversation with The 74, Bernstein said the FTC probe amounts to “another pressure point” that may help change how tech companies operate. “But it’s not just the FTC. It’s the lawsuits, and it’s bad PR that comes from the lawsuits, and hopefully there’ll be regulation. Litigation is expensive. Investors might not want to invest in these new products because there’s risk.”

This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

The obvious interest we have in this is that we’re seeing Character.AI’s new policy, which limits access to its chatbot companions to users 18 or older. I imagine folks like you would say it’s only the first step.

Just the fact that they are taking some precautions means hopefully some kids will not be exposed to what’s been happening — convincing them to kill themselves, convincing them to not talk to their parents, to stay away from their friends. That’s a good thing. 

On the other hand?

I’ve researched how tech companies, especially Meta and other companies, have been behaving for years. So I’m a bit suspicious, because we tend to see these kinds of moves when they’re threatened legally. So it’s not so surprising that it’s happening. They’re under pressure.

In my mind, there are two questions: First of all, what will this look like exactly? In the past, for example, you would see Meta, every time there’s a big privacy breach, they would apologize and say, “We’re fixing it,” and they’ll fix something small and not fix the big thing. So what are they really doing? What kind of age verification mechanisms are they going to use? Secondly, they said they’re creating some space for teens. What is this going to look like? We don’t know. And I believe that until there’s real regulation at stake, we can’t be sure that they will take real precautions. 

I read a earlier this year in which you used the phrase “collective legal action,” saying that this is what’s needed to exert pressure on tech companies to change their designs, which trap users into “overuse.” That’s a fairly recent development, correct?

At the beginning, the people who were writing on this were mostly psychologists. Parents thought it was their own fault. The idea was, “Let me just fix my habits.” It’s self-help. The books that came before me were mostly talking about self-help methods. And when I was thinking about collective action, I realized: Parents can’t really change things by themselves, because you can’t isolate your kid and not give them a cell phone, not give them social media. It becomes an endless fight. And so I thought this has to be changed through collective action, through pressure — through governmental pressure, litigation. 

Jonathan Haidt’s book talks about collective action through parents doing things together in order to not have your kid be the only one who does not have social media or a phone. The idea is that it’s not our fault. It has to be done differently.

And to your point, a lot of this is by design, whether it’s social media or games or AI companions. By design, they’re meant to keep you there, keep you in place, keep you engaged. That’s something that, until recently, was not on a lot of people’s radar.

It took after to come out and explain how it works, to understand it as a business model. There’s no accident. We’re getting these products for free: Gmail for free, Facebook for free. We are paying with our time and our data. They collect data on us in order to target advertising — that’s how they make money. And they need us online for as long as possible so they can collect the data — and also so we will see the ads. So they need to find ways to keep us online. And there are different mechanisms like the infinite scroll. And they come up with new ones. AI companions have new addictive mechanisms: the way that they , they always flatter you. For kids it’s even more addictive, but even for adults it’s, “You’re always doing a great job.”

It’s meant to keep you talking, meant to keep you engaged. You focus a lot on games and social media, but it strikes me that AI companions make those things seem quaint in terms of their addictive qualities, or the potential for real peril.

I agree with you. If you have a spectrum where social media is addictive — people spend many hours online, and they’re not interacting face-to-face — that’s an issue. And you see this with AI companions too. But what’s concerning about AI companions is that it’s much worse for kids. If you think about it, if you’re a kid and you go to middle school, kids are not nice. It’s much nicer to chat with somebody who’s always nice to you. Falling in love and getting your heart broken is not fun. There are many websites that just offer girlfriends that cater to you. So for me, the scariest thing is that kids will just never really develop the skills to have these relationships. And some adults may also stop preferring them.

About a year ago, I wrote a piece in which I talked to a college student, maybe 19 or 20 years old, who admitted that essentially he had outsourced advice about his romantic life to ChatGPT — he had a girlfriend, and whenever they had a fight or disagreement, he would excuse himself, go into the bathroom and ask ChatGPT what he should be doing. I can see that both ways: On the one hand, it just seems incredible. On the other hand, I can see where he’s basically looking for good advice. He’s looking for guidance. What do you make of that?

People say you can get advice, and you can practice your dating skills. I’ll give you something that happened to me, which is on a different scale: I was traveling abroad, and I was in this restaurant, and the menu was in a different language. So what did I do? I took a picture of the menu and uploaded it to ChatGPT and got it translated to English. While I was doing it, a young man came up to my partner and asked to translate. So what happened? I was already busy looking at my phone because I had a translation. My partner was speaking to this young man who was very happy to speak, and they were having a great conversation. 

That’s an example of the kind of things we’re giving up. This guy you wrote about, instead of going to the bathroom, maybe could have asked a friend, developed a deeper relationship with a friend. Maybe they would share experiences. But he gets used to getting the immediate answer from somebody else, and you didn’t develop these relationships. 

We miss out on the possibility of having a human interaction. 

Yes.

In its announcement, Character.AI actually apologized to its younger users, saying that many of them had told the company how important these characters had become to them. And I’ve heard that before. I wonder: How do we as adults start to think about the flip side of this, that it’s difficult for young people to tear themselves away from these things they’ve created? Do you have any sympathy for that?

I have concern, actually, because these kids, sometimes they kill themselves for these bots. So I am concerned about what will happen to kids who are very attached when these bots are suddenly gone. And you hear news stories even of adults who suddenly lost characters they were attached to. It’s a bit like how do you get people who are addicted off the addiction when you suddenly cut them off? These are things we’ve never even thought of.

Is there anything I haven’t asked you that you think is an important piece of this?

An important piece of this is that you don’t yet have every teen, every kid, attached to an AI companion. So there’s a window of opportunity to create change. Social media is much more difficult, because by the time we realized how bad it was, everybody was on social media. The money interests were so big that they would fight every law in court. So it’s really important to move fast and also understand that Character.AI is a small part of the problem. Because it’s not just these specialized websites like Character.AI. It’s ChatGPT — one of the last lawsuits was . The AI bots in ChatGPT are becoming more human, so it’s important that any action is against these bots, against the type of characteristics they have and to regulate how they behave. Just getting rid of Character.AI is not going to solve the problem.

SAN MATEO, Calif. – On a cool Friday morning in April, the halls of California’s San Mateo High School were full of students chatting, running to class or trying to find their friends.

But one common sight in high schools across the country was and always is absent from the halls of San Mateo: cellphones.

“When you look at the crowd, kids are not buried in their phone,” said Yvonne Shiu, the school’s principal. “They have grown to value being in the moment.”

Students at the public high school about 20 minutes south of San Francisco have been prohibited since 2019 from using their cellphones while in school — from bell to bell. Schools nationwide, including some in Maryland, are now increasingly imposing such bans, but San Mateo was one of the earliest and largest schools in the country to implement a complete ban on cellphones during school hours.

At the start of each day, each of the 1,600 students lock their phone in a magnetically sealed pouch, created by the San Francisco-based company Yondr, that won’t be opened until the school day ends.

The decision to introduce Yondr pouches was the school’s attempt to tackle the increasingly pervasive effects of cellphone and social media overuse on its student body: cyberbullying, loss of sleep, self-esteem issues and endless distractions in class.

Teachers and administrators quickly embraced the program, saying it restored their grasp on students’ attention in class. Some even said if the school were to end the program, they’d leave.

As schools around the country implement similar cellphone bans, San Mateo offers a six-year track record of how a cellphone ban can force young people to focus and, in many cases, feel better.

“If schools can help alleviate some of those expectations and pressures about appearance and performance and embarrassment, and take away some of those elements that a lot of kids really struggle with and are confronted with, that is a benefit to them and to the school community and the school culture,” said Casey Teague, a longtime world history teacher at the school.

A slow start

The decision to implement the Yondr program at San Mateo began with observation and a trial run.

One of its faculty members, Alicia Gorgani, observed a similar cellphone ban at San Lorenzo High School, a smaller school in the area, and brought the idea to San Mateo’s teachers and administrators.

Adam Gelb, San Mateo’s assistant principal at the time, said seeing the cellphone ban in action at San Lorenzo “blew [his] mind.”

“Students were engaged with one another,” he said. “They were interacting. They were playing card games. They were playing out on the yard. They were goofing around. They were in circles, talking to each other.”

Gelb helped bring the program to San Mateo, which tested Yondr pouches in a few classrooms in spring 2019.

Teague, who’s worked at the school for more than 20 years, was one of those first instructors to pilot the program. He said he decided to try out the Yondr pouches in his class after noticing students’ smartphones were constantly bombarding them with notifications.

“By 2018, every kid had a phone. That wasn’t anything new,” Teague said. “But the distracting nature of the phone was becoming more and more obvious.”

Health education teacher Brittany Dybdahl said leading up to the ban, the school was seeing an increase in cyberbullying and drama stemming from online activities.

Embarrassing moments or conflicts among students had the risk of getting captured on video and being immortalized online.

“It basically created way more opportunities for students to be emotionally impacted throughout the school day,” Dybdahl said. “And that would, of course, affect their academics and learning.”

After the pilot program, and many discussions with students and their parents, San Mateo implemented the program schoolwide beginning in the 2019-20 academic year.

Some teachers were apprehensive about the cellphone ban, thinking it would create more work for first-period teachers to check that each student had their phones sealed away.

But those checks quickly became part of the daily routine, said physics teacher Patrick Thrasher.

And after seeing the impact the program had on their students, most faculty members got on board, Thrasher said.

“There was such a pretty clear, drastic difference in the classroom,” he said. “It was just night and day.”

San Mateo’s cellphone ban was not even a year old when the COVID-19 pandemic moved all learning online for a year starting in March 2020. But the school decided to continue the cellphone ban when students returned to the classroom in 2021.

“They do spend enough time already on screens that, you know, seven hours a day here at school [without screen time] is not going to kill them,” Shiu said.

The student reaction

Enforcement of the ban hasn’t been entirely without issues.

San Mateo faculty members said some students — albeit a small percentage — are determined to bypass the Yondr pouches and keep their phones on them. Some put calculators, hard drives or other phone-shaped objects in their Yondr pouches. Others put old, unused “burner phones” in their pouches while keeping their personal phone on them.

But many San Mateo students, like junior Lulu Bertolina, embraced the program. She said the Yondr program was one of the reasons she enrolled at San Mateo.

“Having our phones [in Yondr pouches] made it easier to make friends, because I can’t go off on my phone and not make conversation with people,” she said. “It almost forced it — in a really good way.”

For San Mateo senior Siddharth Gogi, the absence of phones made the school feel more welcoming. He said students aren’t glued to their phones playing video games at lunch or distracted on social media in class.

“Conversations move past surface level when you have that time to talk to one another,” said Gogi, San Mateo’s three-time class president who graduated this spring.

He acknowledged, though, that some students are concerned about not having quick access to their phones in case of an emergency.

In the early 2000s, many schools repealed their cellphone restrictions after the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado.

But Shiu said it’s better if students don’t have access to their phones during an emergency. The pouches prevent students and family members from sharing misinformation or flooding 911 with calls overwhelming first responders and the cellphone network.

“In any emergency, we want students to be focused on the adult giving the information,” Shiu said.

The experts

To hear the experts tell it, there’s an overriding good reason for schools to ban cellphones. Cellphone use and social media sites can both have a serious impact on young peoples’ well-being.

Extensive cellphone use during the day has a “direct correlation with a decline in mental health,” said Annette Anderson, the deputy director of the Johns Hopkins University Center for Safe and Healthy Schools.

“We also know that cellphone use late into the evening has a disruptive factor in our young people getting enough sleep and then being attentive enough in the morning,” Anderson said.

Young people are grappling with the reality that the phone in their hand could be doing them harm. A Pew Research Survey released in April found almost half of U.S. teens age 13 to 17 agreed social media sites have a mostly negative impact on kids their age.

San Mateo wellness counselor Helen Citrin said a cellphone ban can provide students a much-needed break from their phones.

For students who are highly anxious or struggle managing their emotions, Citrin said, not having access to a cellphone can help as it prevents them from constantly texting their parents.

“That pouch offers a boundary,” she said.

One recent study echoed this sentiment. Independent research on school cellphone bans is limited, but a 2024 study conducted by Yondr found that students saw a 15% increase in the likelihood they received a passing grade after their school implemented Yondr pouches. The report also found a 44% decrease in behavioral referrals after implementation.

Data from San Mateo paints a mixed picture of the school’s performance since implementation of the cellphone ban. Math and English test scores declined from 2019 through 2024, but both the graduation rate and preparedness for college and careers have inched upward. Meanwhile, the suspension rate increased.

Gelb offered an explanation for the rise: “Everybody was forced to communicate in person, so you had more people talking, and there’s more chance for someone to say the wrong thing or be in the wrong place.”

But, he added, the premeditated incidents and cyberbullying disappeared from the school day.

A growing trend

Although San Mateo might have been early to the cellphone ban movement, it’s among growing company now.

State and local governments and school districts across the country are now considering — or have already passed — policies on cellphone use in school. Yondr boasts that millions of students from all 50 states are now using its pouches.

While there is no statewide ban in Maryland, more than a third of its public schools prohibit cellphone use, . Several school districts, including Howard and Baltimore counties, have passed a total ban.

About 30% of U.S. schools now have a ban on cellphone use throughout the school day, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

That percentage is likely to rise. In the nation’s largest state, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed legislation last year requiring all public and charter schools in California to create a policy to reduce or ban cellphone use during school hours by July 1, 2026, but left each school or school district to decide the specifics of their policy.

And recently, New York joined the more than two dozen other states instituting a complete ban on cellphones during school hours.

Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) said the decision comes as part of the state’s efforts to protect youth mental health.

“Our young people succeed when they’re learning and growing, not clicking and scrolling,” Hochul said in a statement in May.

A model to follow?

San Mateo faculty and staff said the school’s careful implementation of the Yondr program and the conversations it had with families and educators led to its success.

But several San Mateo faculty members said Yondr alone can’t solve youth mental health issues stemming from social media and personal devices.

The second students leave school grounds, they once again have access to their phones and can browse as much as they want. Citrin, the school’s wellness counselor, said many of the students she deals with stay up late into the night doomscrolling, or texting or video chatting with friends.

That being the case, Gelb said schools should also teach students how to develop a healthy relationship with their phone and social media.

The pouches also carry a financial impact on schools.

Each student at San Mateo receives a free Yondr pouch at the beginning of the school year, but each replacement costs $15. In total, Shiu estimated the school spends about $20,000 a year on Yondr pouches.

However, San Mateo teachers and administrators said the program’s benefits outweigh its costs.

“From a school perspective, it keeps kids off of their phone during class time,” Citrin said. “Because the main focus here is education, that’s what the purpose is, and that’s what the use is benefiting.”

Capital News Service is a student-staffed reporting service operated by the University of Maryland’s Phillip Merrill College of Journalism. Stories are available at the  and may be reprinted as long as credit is given to Capital News Service and, most importantly, to the students who produced the work.

Screen time permeates the lives of toddlers and preschoolers. For many young children, their exposure includes both direct viewing, such as watching a TV show, and indirect viewing, such as when media is on in the background during other daily activities.

As many parents will know, . As scholars who specialize in and , we are particularly interested in the recent finding that too much screen time is associated with less parent-child talk, such as .

As a result, the and suggest limiting screen time for children.

Beyond quantity, they also emphasize the quality of a child’s engagement with digital media. Used in moderation, certain kinds of media can – and even contribute to language development.

These tips may help parents structure and manage screen time more effectively.

No. 1: Choose high-quality content

Parents can enhance their children’s screen-time value by choosing high-quality media – that is, content with educational benefit. , from “Nature Cat” to “Sid the Science Kid,” that would qualify as educational.

Two other elements contribute to the quality of screen time.

First, screen content should be age-appropriate – that is, parents should choose shows, apps and games that are specifically designed for young children. Using a resource such as allows parents to check recommended ages for television shows, movies and apps.

Second, parents can look for shows that use evidence-based educational techniques, such as participatory cues. That’s when characters in shows break the “fourth wall” by directly talking to their young audience to prompt reflection, action or response. that children learn new words better when a show has participatory cues – perhaps because it encourages active engagement rather than passive viewing.

Many classic, high-quality television shows for young children feature participatory cues, including “,” “,” “” and “.”

No. 2: Join in on screen time

The that whenever possible.

This recommendation is based on the evidence that increased screen media use can reduce parent-child conversation. This, in turn, can affect . Intentionally discussing media content with children increases language exposure during screen time.

Parents may find the following joint media engagement strategies useful:

• Press pause and ask questions.
• Point out basic concepts, such as letters and colors.
• Model more advanced language using a “think aloud” approach, such as, “That surprised me! I wonder what will happen next?”

No. 3: Connect what’s on screen to real life

because their brains struggle to transfer information and ideas from screens to the real world. Children learn more from screen media, research shows, when the content connects to their real-life experiences.

To maximize the benefits of screen time, parents can help children connect what they are viewing with experiences they’ve had. For example, while watching content together, a parent might say, “They’re going to the zoo. Do you remember what we saw when we went to the zoo?”

This approach promotes language development and cognitive skills, including . Children learn better with repeated exposure to words, so selecting media that relates to a child’s real-life experiences can help reinforce new vocabulary.

No. 4: Enjoy screen-free times

Ensuring that a child’s day is filled with varied experiences, including periods that don’t involve screens, increases language exposure in children’s daily routines.

Two ideal screen-free times are mealtimes and bedtime. Mealtimes present opportunities for back-and-forth conversation with children, exposing them to a lot of language. Additionally, bedtime should be screen-free, as using screens near bedtime or having a TV in children’s bedrooms .

Alternatively, devoting bedtime to reading children’s books accomplishes the dual goals of helping children wind down and creating a .

Having additional screen-free, one-on-one, parent-child play for at least 10 minutes at some other point in the day is good for young children. Parents can maximize the benefits of one-on-one play by letting .

A parent’s role here is to follow their child’s lead, play along, give their child their full attention – so no phones for mom or dad, either – and provide language enrichment. They can do this by labeling toys, pointing out shapes, colors and sizes. It can also be done by describing activities – “You’re rolling the car across the floor” – and responding when their child speaks.

Parent-child playtime is also a great opportunity to extend interests from screen time. Including toys of your child’s favorite characters from the shows or movies they love in playtime transforms that enjoyment from screen time into learning.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

In an era where digital devices are everywhere, the term “screen time” has become a buzz phrase in discussions about technology’s impact on people’s lives. Parents are . But what if this entire approach to screen time is fundamentally flawed?

It’s not uncommon today to see children glued to their screens. In fact, 80% of parents with children 11 or younger say their kids watch YouTube videos, according to a . Half of these parents say their kids watch videos every day – some even several times a day.

But staring at a screen for too long can negatively impact children’s well-being – . According to research, kids demonstrate when their screen time surpasses one hour a day. They are also more likely to experience anxiety and depression and suffer from . Even short, fast-paced videos have consequences, impacting the .

I believe it is essential to explore how to use technology in a way that can positively impact children’s ability to think and communicate. Audiobooks present a compelling case.

Starting around , most children can comprehend simple stories and fairy tales. Audiobooks can be particularly useful during car rides, bedtime routine and quiet playtime. For school-aged children, they can by providing an alternative way to experience books. And most importantly, they can – much more than videos.

Here are five ways that audiobooks can enhance children’s ability to learn:

Enhances imagination and intelligence

Unlike videos, which provide visual and auditory stimuli, audiobooks rely solely on listening. This encourages children to visualize the story in their minds, . In contrast, passive videos provide preformed images that require no voluntary imagination.

Unlike , which happens spontaneously and unintentionally, such as in a dream during sleep, is the deliberate effort to create new images in the mind. People are not born with this ability. Rather, it must be during childhood through conversations and engagement with stories and fairy tales.

Research indicates that voluntary imagination leads to . In fact, training voluntary imagination is .

Develops listening skills and attention span

Listening to audiobooks requires children to focus and pay attention to the spoken word, promoting the . Unlike the passive consumption of videos, where the visual component dominates a child’s attention, comprehending an audiobook demands active listening. This can improve a child’s ability to concentrate and maintain attention for longer periods.

Expands vocabulary and language skills

Audiobooks are a valuable tool for expanding a child’s . Exposure to rich and varied language allows children to encounter new words and phrases in context, which aids in .

Compared with print books, audiobooks feature expressive narration, which can model proper pronunciation, intonation and rhythm.

Encourages independent learning

Audiobooks can foster a sense of independence in young children as they create their own unique vision of the scenes and events described in a book. This can cultivate a habit of independent learning as children follow complex narratives, infer meaning and make connections between different parts of the story. This self-directed learning approach can and lay a strong foundation for future academic success.

Preserves eyesight

Excessive screen time can strain children’s eyes, leading to discomfort and potential , including nearsightedness. Audiobooks, on the other hand, eliminate the need for screens, giving children’s eyes a much-needed break.

Audiobooks are a powerful tool for enhancing a child’s cognitive and linguistic development, and many are available for free at local libraries or on apps like . As parents and educators seek to nurture smarter and more well-rounded children, audiobooks can play a significant role.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

Here are our top five takeaways:

1. We all rely on screens. For better and worse, “People use screens because it’s an easy way to keep kids occupied and safe when they need to get other things done,” Dr. Deborah Rosenfeld of the explained. Speaking from personal experience, she emphasized that this “is not a unique problem of income that leads to people using screens as babysitters.”

While technology became ubiquitous during the Covid pandemic, using digital media to distract and entertain young children is not ideal, especially if it interferes with play and learning opportunities.

2. Consider the timing and type of digital media exposure. Kris Perry, executive director of , said, “For all young children, high amounts of screen time, especially without adult guidance or as a passive pursuit, is unambiguously detrimental to their learning and development. It’s not until the second year of life that there is any evidence that children benefit from media for learning, and even that requires direct facilitation and reteaching from an adult.”

Fundamental skills and abilities develop during early childhood. Greater screen time in infancy, Perry said, can lead to lower attention and executive function at nine years old.” Research shows physical and social-emotional impacts as well.

3. Technology should not displace playful learning. Screen time correlates with poorer social and language development. “We came into being with optimization for being around other people and with this physical world,” explained Dr. Victor Lee of Stanford University’s . “Our hardware is best treated and fine-tuned within that space.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends children ages one to five get at least 60 minutes a day of moderate to vigorous physical activity, and panelists agree that screen time should not interfere. “Screen time displacement for peer play relates to worse fine and gross motor skills for one- to three-year-olds,” Perry said, endorsing the AAP guidelines.

4. High-quality educational digital resources are scarce. Parents and caregivers must use caution in the media that children consume. Lee compared the prevalence of new technology to the processed food revolution, which made cheap, easily distributed foods widely available. “It doesn’t mean that it is as healthy, desirable or should be replacing what we have elsewhere,” he argued.

Rosenfeld recommended and as reputable resources for finding developmentally appropriate content for children. Perry recommends that caregivers refer to (from Kathy Hirsh-Pasek and others) when discerning if a digital media resource has the potential to promote learning.

Even with high-quality digital-based content, Lee said, “It is not there to, nor is it ever going to be capable of replacing what humans do, especially concerning how we support the development, growth and autonomy of our kids.”

5. Synchronous learning and healthy modeling should be prioritized. “Synchronicity is a caregiver sitting beside a child watching a show, playing a game,” Rosenfeld explained. That is not the typical situation. She suggests incorporating methods to mediate learning, like discussing key concepts, ideas and character interactions, which are critical when incorporating digital media and resources asynchronously.

Perry stressed that caregivers should “remember what the long-term effects are on children, not only directly when they’re on devices, but watching adults be on devices are also interrupting their opportunities to develop.”

Here are five takeaways: 

1. Focus on content, not time. Many parents are told to impose strict rules about screen time, but Guernsey argued that in these extraordinary times, “We can relax those limits and be forgiving.” She did note that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends zero solo screen time before 18 months, but they say joint media engagement—where parents and caregivers point out what they’re viewing and talk about it — has its place. The context matters too: viewing media with friends and family and talking about what you see on screen (or recounting those stories later, when the screen is off) is much better for learning than viewing alone.

2. Use tech as a means of connection. It’s a double-edged sword. While it sometimes feels like technology is turning us into a nation of zombies, it’s also something to appreciate when we can’t connect in person. The speakers mentioned Facetime and Zoom playdates, dance parties and book clubs. Guernsey described a “bear hunt” that took place in a Connecticut neighborhood—families drove or walked around town looking for teddy bears that had been placed in the windows of the houses. They recommended thinking of some online activities, such as Facetime with grandparents, in terms of how they can strengthen long-distance relationships. “Make it about values,” Guernsey said, rather than focusing so much on academics or getting things done.
3. Use screens as babysitters—sometimes. “It’s hard to have little kids around 24/7,” admitted Guernsey, and parents who are lucky enough to be able to work from home can get “Zoomifried”—a term she credited to Kathy Hirsh-Pasek. While co-viewing is always ideal, TV shows for kids can benefit social and emotional development. She mentioned Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood and other content, while a webinar participant recommended Discovery’s . “It’s not the screen time I worry about,” Gurensey said, “It’s the mindlessness time.”
4. Let online stuff lead to offline activities. Streaming video is an inherently passive pastime, but it can be a springboard for reading, physical activity and creative projects. You don’t need fancy art supplies to make a book about a movie you’ve watched. A game you played online can lead to a scavenger hunt. Surfing the web can spark ideas for making a mess—or a snack—in the kitchen.
5. Recognize the differences between learning in a classroom and learning onscreen. Given the weeks and, possibly, months of closed schools, let’s all appreciate the teachers who are trying to do so much with so little, but face it: we’ll never replicate what kids would be getting in school. Kois said he saw the pandemic as a chance to promote the idea that “learning is a thing that’s worth doing”—that is, not just for grades or stickers. He added, perhaps a tad wishfully, “Kids’ boredom threshold will plummet. They may become receptive to suggestions they would have rejected before.”