Social networking sites 'changing children's brains'

[2010]

Social networking websites are changing children's brains because they make young people more self-centred and cut their attention spans, a neuroscientist has warned.

By Matthew Moore
Last Updated: 12:36AM GMT 24 Feb 2009

Popular sites like Facebook, Twitter and Bebo risk "infantilising" the minds of users, creating a generation of children who demand instant gratification, it is argued.

Baroness Greenfield, director of the Royal Institution, said she has concerns that internet-obsessed children were losing the ability to concentrate and communicate away from the screen.

Regular web users displayed a need for constant reassurance typical of small babies, she said yesterday.

In an earlier House of Lords debate she warned that conversations in chat rooms, message boards and on networking websites were replacing the face-to-face interactions that are key to developing a child's sociability.

"I often wonder whether real conversation in real time may eventually give way to these sanitised and easier screen dialogues, in much the same way as killing, skinning and butchering an animal to eat has been replaced by the convenience of packages of meat on the supermarket shelf," she said.

"It is hard to see how living this way on a daily basis will not result in brains, or rather minds, different from those of previous generations."

Earlier this month Baroness Greenfield urged more research into a possible connections between high computer use among young people and the rising rates of autism.

Teenagers spend an average of 31 hours a week online, research suggests. Social networking sites that allow young people to keep in touch with their friends, publish photos and post updates on what they are doing are particularly popular.

Scientists are divided about the mental consequences of the digital revolution; a study published last year showed that internet use could improve brain function and speed up decision-making but at the expense of empathy and the ability to think in abstract terms.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/facebook/4790044/Social-networking-sites-changing-childrens-brains.html

[drewt431]

Bump!

Good article.

[Geolibertarian]

Social networking websites are changing children's brains because they make young people more self-centred and cut their attention spans, a neuroscientist has warned.

By Matthew Moore
Last Updated: 12:36AM GMT 24 Feb 2009

Popular sites like Facebook, Twitter and Bebo risk "infantilising" the minds of users, creating a generation of children who demand instant gratification, it is argued.

Baroness Greenfield, director of the Royal Institution, said she has concerns that internet-obsessed children were losing the ability to concentrate and communicate away from the screen.

See how they cleverly switch from "popular sites like Facebook" to the entire "Internet" (which, of course, includes interactive sites like this one)?

I don't dispute the possibility that excessive time spent at fluff sites like Facebook has negative effects on developing brains, but does anyone honestly think that the damage done by excessive Internet use compares to the damage done by this?

http://turnoffyourtv.com/healtheducation/tv_adhd/tv_adhdmain.html


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/mobile-phone-use-raises-childrens-risk-of-brain-cancer-fivefold-937005.html


Is it possible that the real reason they're waxing alarmist about web sites that allow for (gasp!) social interaction is that such sites are the primary reason why films such as Loose Change and TerrorStorm consistently become the most watched documentaries on the Internet?

If this is truly driven by concern over the health of children's "brains," then why the comparative silence (or, when forced to address it, the public relations spin) on such things as mercury-laced vaccines, fluoridated water supplies, and forced-drugging?

       http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3609599239524875493
       http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2886269353175462948
       http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6890106663412840646

[Wood0173]

I actually cannot believe that these social networking sites are the new "social world."  Back when I was in high school (graduated in '00), if you went online, you had to keep that to yourself...maybe exclusively with just your friends.  You were absolutely clowned on and looked at as a nerd if your peers knew that you went online for any reason whatsoever.  From my observations, it is totaly cool and not considered lame for these kids to go on Myspace, Facebook, etc., take pictures of themselves flexing (or looking "sexy" for the girls).  I have trouble taking that in but these kids were the first onces introduced to the first-person shooter games at the age of eight.  So they have been online since they were 5-6 years old and as you mature little by little, your perspectives change and you discover that you do have interests outside of video games.  You go and use the Internet for other things.  Ofcourse, there is this database that all of your friends are on.  You can actually talk to them without even leaving your house.  Heck, you can hang out with them thanks to web cameras.  You can kick it with all of your peers without even moving a muscle.  Well, maybe your finger to make sure that the screen saver doesn't go on but it's limited to that.  I really don't know how people are going to be in 15 years (if we still exist) but I imagine that your online world will be your world...except for when you go to the occasional LANparty or I guess, bar that you find out about c/o a Myspace bulletin ofcourse.

[Freeski]

Oh great, the 45-plus generation was brainwashed, en masse, by television and the rest of the MSM; the 30-plussers got that same brainwashing as young people, along with cell phones AND the "social networking fluff" (later in life); the tweens, teens and 20 year olds can add a new generation of video games and instant messaging and presence/tracking to the mix; and God only knows what the children will face - although we can speculate.

The Internet and all of these methods of communication have tremendous potential for sharing the "truth", but the MSM (esp. TV), schools and polical leadership has already laid the groundwork of propaganda and short-attention-span-training that most will indeed opt for the instant and meaningless gratification, and never know what they're missing.

Of course that's just my opinion...

[cdub939]

[Mustard911]

they give a false security to globalism.  People think that this system is all ok as people are so called getting alone at their internet networkign level.  That opposite is true.  People are destroying their lives and allowing evil to prosper.

[Scootle]

I knew there was a reason I hated social sites so much I made a song parody called "MySpace Is Ghay" and even own the domain name http://www.myspaceisghay.co.uk lol

[TheGoodFight1984]

some must-know info on myspace / facebook - http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=75606.msg421268#msg421268

[blackturtle.us]

I'm not buying into the claims made in this article at all. If we want to look at elements of the modern environment that promote instant gratification we can make an extremely long list of items that did not exist just a few months ago. There are convenience stores, microwave ovens, sitcoms, fast food restaurants, etc. that all cater to the desire for convenient and quick gratification. It would be fairly accurate to say that our entire society is oriented toward instant gratification. To lay that on social networking sites or the internet in general seems sloppy at best!

[Resistenz81]

As with everything, too much of one thing is never good. Social networking sites allow people (not just teens) to keep in touch with friends in a very efficient way. When I was in my teens, instant messaging wasn't as easily accessible so I relied more on the telephone. Of course if you had a friend that you could make a long distance call to, it would cost money. The same can be said about cell phones. With these social networking sites, you already pay an internet bill, so it doesn't cost you and extra to register an account and communicate with people. It's not entirely 'changing a child's brain'. But of course parents need to limit the amount time and access their child has to the internet anyway, so it doesn't effect their real life social interaction. Social networking sites allow them to communicate with their real life friends (for the most part) which they met in well, real life.

I think television is much worse due to the constant messages being sent to children. Ultimately the adults in the household have the responsibility to limit potentially damaging media. Whether it's violent video games, movies, tv shows or internet content. Making sure they are educated (even with our terrible public education system) should be top priority. And other diversions (when not studying) are necessary for their development. 

[deconstructmyhouse]

I knew there was a reason I hated social sites so much I made a song parody called "MySpace Is Ghay" and even own the domain name http://www.myspaceisghay.co.uk lol

New social sites NOT controlled by CIA

Space Book     creating books full of space: nothing but space.  empty space on each and every page
My Face     an in depth scrutiny of your every facial feature, including microscopic eyelash mites

[abrhim]

but god forbid some one says Grand Theft Auto changes you?!?...good article and i stand by my GTA/violent video game post.

[EvriknagRUS]

Social networking sites offer several benefits to members, many of which are just plain fun. There are so many things to do once you register that it can take some time to get a taste of everything. For those who have not discovered social networking sites, it is definitely time to crawl out from under your rock.

[Joe Public]

There is a new movie coming out in March 2013 about cloning Jesus called "The Power of Few", starring Christian Slater and Christopher Walken.