Louis C.K.: I won't let my kids have cell phones

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57603820-71/louis-c.k.-why-i-wont-let-my-kids-have-cell-phones/

by kunai • 13 years ago

71 70 13 years ago

news.cnet.com

This is a smart guy.

People are adapting to texting and emails very quickly, especially the new generation. It's not true that you are somehow less responsible for what you write in a text message these days. In fact I think the only reason for somebody to believe otherwise is that at least you have it now on record as opposed to hearing nothing or rumors who said what when.

psbp6• 13 years ago

I think he's arguing against the excuse for avoiding healthy interaction rather than the medium of communication. If text messaging provoked us to be more earnest and empathetic, then it wouldn't be considered as much of a problem.

cko• 13 years ago

I agree. I think he has a high degree of self-awareness, and he is able to communicate in a way that many people can understand.

shn• 13 years ago

Resistance is futile. (unfortunately)

rll• 13 years ago

I dunno, I am 44 and have never had a cell phone nor do I see the need for one. It's not that hard to resist.

s_q_b4• 13 years ago

I have a rock in my pocket that has access to all of the world's knowledge. Why would anyone deprive another human being of that?

kunai2• 13 years ago

Because they might also have a boulder on their desk at home that has access to all the world's knowledge as well?

s_q_b4• 13 years ago

Say that sentence out loud and I think you'll understand my point.

Look, I understand the tremendously damaging addictive potential of new technologies. We've seen this again and again, from Pong to World of Warcraft, these devices provide dopamine and must be treated with caution.

But is it wise to cloister our children away from these developments? Or is it better that they learn to adapt, especially in a world where the speed of technological advancement, and the addictive potential inherent therein, is accelerating at a rapid pace?

Personally, I know which choice makes sense to me.

loganfrederick• 13 years ago

Did you even read the article/listen to his bit on Conan? I'm a huge supporter of technology, but a lot of people overlook Louis's point, which is that constant access to everything makes people over-reliant on constant stimulation, and that constant stimulation can actually decrease happiness and satisfaction with life.

He himself has a modern cell phone, so obviously he sees the benefits. But he is also self-aware of the drawbacks, and does a good comedic job of demonstrating those.

s_q_b4• 13 years ago

Yes, I think he has some great points. But those points are outweighed by:

1. The necessity of adapting to the lure of technology in order to successfully navigate the modern world.

2. The incalculable benefit such devices can provide if used correctly.

psbp6• 13 years ago

Because it's also a distraction rock that excuses you from the vestiges of normal human communication.

muzz2• 13 years ago

Hopefully the owners of these rocks have more self control than that. Maybe his point is that children aren't capable of that kind of self-control, but adults should be.

vdaniuk• 13 years ago

Normal human communication is a very various range of experiences, some or many of them may be worse than using a distraction rock.

dmschulman• 13 years ago

How often are you using that rock for learning something new vs reading Facebook or playing a game?

TeMPOraL• 13 years ago

reading Facebook or playing a game?

It's called "communication" and "having fun", respectively. Just because the new ways we have didn't exist 100 years ago doesn't mean they're bad, or even worse than what we did in the past.

coldtea3• 13 years ago

First, who said constant access to "all of the world's knowledge" is a good thing? Ever heard of shallow knowledge, dilletantism and dambling?

Second, just because something potentially "has access to all of the world's knowledge" doesn't mean it's used to gain access to that, and not to, say post BS pictures of your food or avoid people while in their presense.

dobbsbob• 13 years ago

Agreed. This is more reactionary nonsense I remember hearing in the 1990s when nintendo would ruin everything. Before that cable and MTV was going to ruin society. Before that dancing and horror movies would destroy future generations.

I distinctly recall my parents kicking me off the landline phone in the early 90s every single night from talking to my friends, because they could hear me in my room so instead of staring at a flickering box with mundane sitcoms my other alternative was to jump on IRC or dial STS chatboards to talk to hackers in NYC that gave me (what was at the time) priceless information. How did that hurt my communications skills or development. By the time mobile phones became affordable I was already chatting with all of my IRL friends using online messenger instead of calling them since as kids, you are always kicked off the phone or parents/siblings pick up landlines and would listen in.

One thing I definitely know kids do is lookup safe sex and other awkward questions on sexuality and gender on their phones. Why you would deny your kid access to medical information and peer counselling so they can make correct choices or seek depression outlets I have no idea. They aren't going to ask you anything, and schools have sex ed too late. I used to listen to a call in radio show late at night when I was 13 that was all about sex ed. These shows don't exist anymore, there's nothing on cable, and parents are even more reactionary conservative now just look at the Tea Party nutbar parents attempting to extinguish sex ed from schools at every opportunity. Kids are unlikely to do it on a home computer too because there might be history their parents can find.

How do I know kids are doing this? Because the local schools here told everybody that the majority of searches done on school open wifi was sex ed and gay support groups (not porn, medical sites). They cited this as a reason to start sex ed in Grade 6 instead of the usual Grade 9. They are also looking up drug safety specifically MDMA correct doses and how to identify fake drugs, or how to order testing kits.

Just make sure you tell your kid not to use social media under a real identity ever, and to be careful where they send pictures to avoid future facial recognition software databases, blackmail and stalkers.

Nothing your kids do now is any different than what you did as a kid just you can't remember how shitty it was staring at the wall all night because you were forbidden to go out on a school night, TV was complete shit, the radio played nothing but bland shit and you had nothing interesting to read since your parents denied you any literature they didn't want you to see. My parents discovered a philosophy book that doubted the existence of God and they shredded it in front of me, so I went online and read it. I had to sneak out of my house in the middle of the night just so I could see my Grade 8 girlfriend to talk for a few hours in a dangerous pitch black park. Now you can just text each other or jump on chat instead of wandering the streets at one in the morning.

EDIT: I bet his kids already have smart phones and just hide them. Every school has a small trading economy just trade an older Android in exchange for homework being done or sell something. A kid in my school sold candy in grade 5 all the other kids bought daily. He was super rich by kid standards. I traded a bunch of hacker tfilez and private invites to warez boards in exchange for a pager in 1991. Another kid would rent his father's porn mags and videos out, and in Grade 8 a kid in my school would sell cheat codes and finishing moves to video games in the arcades. You could also pay the kid who worked in the office to give you a late slip instead of getting the standard detention and lecture.

mixmastamyk2• 13 years ago

It sounds like you may be projecting your difficult experience with your parents on LCK. I don't get the feeling he is nearly that hardcore. Also, denying access to bad habits is quite different than destroying books with "dangerous" ideas.

rodly2• 13 years ago

I don't think his argument makes a ton of sense. Children still interact through school, recess, sports, etc. Yes, they might post something hateful on Facebook or text something insulting to a friend but they still get to see the effects of their actions by comments. They still have to answer for their words the next day or right in the comment thread. No child wants to be excluded and will learn to play nice eventually. Phones can probably be related to board games or cards of the years past. Children have always found ways to keep to themselves when they're bored.

muzz2• 13 years ago

Yes, CK is equating ownership with excessive use.

coldtea3• 13 years ago

Which, statistically, it's pretty much correct.

ahoge• 13 years ago

Phones can probably be related to board games or cards of the years past.

Except that phones are pretty much the opposite of that. Thanks to the magic of today's phones you won't have to deal with those boring people who happen to be in the same room as you.

kohanz3• 13 years ago

Exactly. Board and card games involve face-to-face social interaction.

lkbm• 13 years ago

When I was a kid, I always brought a book with me when I went places. Portable entertainment is not new. Occasionally I'd bring a deck of cards and play solitaire if I anticipated being somewhere conducive to that.

Our tendency to blame age-old problems on modern scapegoats usually reaffirms our biases, but less often is upheld by the data.

kohanz3• 13 years ago

Are you implying that cyber-bullying (for lack of a better name, I don't much like it either) is not a real problem? I think we have ample evidence that it does present a unique problem.

That being said, I think Louis CK's more important point is his latter one, that many people are becoming too dependent on their phones to fill the silence or quiet times in their day-to-day. I'm guilty of this too and I don't think it's healthy. I'm not saying we should all pull over in our cars and bawl to a Springsteen song, but there is something to be said for time for quiet thought and self reflection which is very easy to replace and lose when you're always checking to see what the latest is on Twitter or HN.

rodly2• 13 years ago

That natural discourse for cyber bulling is to block those who continuously berate you online. If that's not an option, seek out an authority at your school or consider abandoning whichever mediums they're targeting. Bullying sucks though, sometimes the only solution is to wait it out and suffer through as little as possible of it.

That being said, I think Louis CK's more important point is his latter one, that many people are becoming too dependent on their phones to fill the silence or quiet times in their day-to-day.

I respectfully disagree. If you ask your parents what they used to do when they had free time (silence, quiet time, whatever) they wouldn't tell you that they did some introspection. They'd say they went outside and climbed trees, they read a book or tried a puzzle, watched television and maybe even napped. The only reason children love to be on their phones more than those things previously mentioned, is because of how quickly stimulating a phone is. Complex and HD games, the sum of the worlds knowledge in a glowing rectangle, and instant communication with all of their friends.

The older crowd just doesn't think it's natural. I don't blame them because frankly it does look a bit disturbing when you see a crowd of people glaring straight down into their phone when life is occurring all around them.

rabino• 13 years ago

Related: this is a great essay on the topic.

http://m.chronicle.com/article/The-End-of-Solitude/3708

Spittie• 13 years ago

I'm not a parent. I'm not old enough to have lived in an age when phones weren't common (19 years old).

And I totally agree with him. I didn't have myself my first phone until I was 14 years old (with some exceptions, like when going on school trips), and I can't thanks my parents enough for this.

I agree that smartphones can be really useful. You have infinite knowledge in your hand when you have a smartphone and a connection to internet.

But, you can also start depending on it. I know several people that can't leave their smartphones alone for more than 5 minutes, even when involved in social events. And it's not to access knowledge, it's either to chat with someone else, or check the latest "meme" over facebook.

Yes, it's "having fun", but when you're not able to live the moment, and have to access Facebook/Whatsapp every 5 minutes, it's called dependence.

Hopefully, Louis's child will not get into it. Thanks to their dad, they'll learn to enjoy real life, to enjoy the moment. And when they'll get their first smartphone, they'll be to busy enjoying their live to use it everytime.

goblinfoblin• 13 years ago

I'm a bit older than you (6 years) and had a cell phone since I was in (I think) middle school. My phone was primarily for staying in contact with my mother because I was out of the house a large amount of the time, you don't need a smartphone for this.

At this time I think it probably would suck to be older than 13 and not have a phone, everyone you know is going to have one and that is going to be how they communicate with their friends if you don't have one you will get left out of the loop.

It is a parents choice but it might hurt children socially, on the other hand there were a few outliers in my high school who spent every minute of class on their phone (before smartphones were big) but this could be solved with prepaid phones.

alaskamiller• 13 years ago

I'll let you in on a secret.

You are likely boring in person, so your friends turn to little pocket computer games to entertain themselves instead. Your friends are also rude little kids that lack the ability to control themselves.

Either way you all will grow out of it.

You'll get old and boring, and those computer games turn into little email and skype apps where you constantly have to maintain for the sake of a job because your work life balance is whackadoodle. But for the most part you'll grow out of caring about your little phone because... here's the god honest truth... it's all pretty boring.

Louis CK didn't tap into some new found glory, but at 19 you think he did, not realizing this just yet another repost, an old truth we keep rediscovering... that kids these days are always little tyrants.

Socrates said it. Plato quoted it. Every single generation thereafter grow up and comment about it. Way back it was books of "questionable" morals and alcohol. Back then it was gangsta rap and MTV. Nowadays it's Farmville and iPhones. Next it's going to be fake realities and fake projections.

There is always going to be something made by somebody else to distract you.

It'll be okay.

Take a deep breath.

It'll be okay.

You're on a fast track ticket to being old.

vectorpush• 13 years ago

Why don't we just teach children how to practice moderation?

Unless as a punishment, I think it makes more sense to simply guide them as to when phone use is appropriate or excessive and make sure to be stern with those standards. This is not a new problem, it's pretty similar to the generation before us dealing with kids who stayed in all day playing video games. Sure, the kid will do whatever they want once they're out of your sight, but at the end of the day they'll insert your lessons into the category of "behaviors that adults expect me to embrace" and the individual child will react accordingly.

Klinky6• 13 years ago

When did Louis C.K. become the guru of the internet, and when did parents decide they should accept parenting advice from a comic who's act is extremely child unfriendly?

Not only do I think a child not having a cellphone(even just a basic one) is a security risk, but I'd also think it could lead to less of a social life, not more of one. Kids not fitting into their peer group and being ostracized or picked on due to a lack of a phone/smartphone probably doesn't seem like a big deal to the 20, 30, or 40-something parent. Probably because that 20,30, or 40-something parent has forgotten what it was like to be a 7th grader. It also breeds feelings of resentment, and it portrays to the child a beautiful example of hypocrisy, as the parental unit continues to use the so-called "socially destructive" devices.

If you are not planning on giving your child a cellphone because you're afraid of it's destructive effect on their ability to communicate with other human beings, then what more are you doing to encourage social growth in your child? Not giving your kid a cellphone is a passive action, not a proactive action.

Helianthus3• 13 years ago

Let's be clear, Louis C.K. is a parent, and in general any advice given to parents is a priori given to caveat emptor.

nether• 13 years ago

http://www.theonion.com/articles/magazine-runs-article-about...

kunai2• 13 years ago

A child will not get shot or kidnapped for not having a cell phone, and those who will ostracize your child because of the technology they don't have don't deserve to be your kid's friend anyhow. One could say that there is an ostensible social and security risk in not having a cell phone compared to if one didn't have a cell phone, but the risk really is very low, and if that level of risk disturbs you, an el-cheapo prepaid phone with no minutes on it (just 911) will suffice. I think people forget that we lived not even as early as 5 years ago where smartphones were not considered a necessity. Kids did fine with basic or no cell phones at all.

And before you pull the "Did you forget 7th grade" argument, I'm in high school. I only own an unactivated iPhone for development and testing, and really never call anyone.

Klinky6• 13 years ago

In the 90s there was a big fear of stranger danger, and that your child might get abducted, but maybe that was just pumped up scaremongering. It's much easier to coordinate with a child if they have a cellphone. You can send a text or call, or in a worst case scenario it could be used to triangulate a location.

You have shunned having an active cellphone. That is your choice, which may not be representative of another kid's choice. I don't think parents should force a phone on to their child if the child doesn't want it.

jonahx• 13 years ago

and those who will ostracize your child because of the technology they don't have don't deserve to be your kid's friend anyhow.

yeah, but what if they're really cool and good-looking?

moocowduckquack3• 13 years ago

"when did parents decide they should accept parenting advice from a comic who's act is extremely child unfriendly?"

Parenting advice is for parents, whether his stage act is child friendly is completely immaterial.

Klinky6• 13 years ago

Being a parent isn't a very good indicator of good advice either. It seems that a favorite past time of parents which I have observed is commenting on the poor parenting done by others, including such gems as "they got their 11 year old an iPhone, can you believe that!?".

I think that judging the character/reliability of a source before citing it to support a position is important. Though it's doubtful people are actually gleaning parenting advice from this instance of Louis C.K., and it's most likely going to be used more for confirmation bias instead. I am just suggesting people should pause to reflect on who they're aligning themselves with to confirm their biases.

epsylon2• 13 years ago

security risk

That's bullshit. The only security risk is if as a parent, you don't know where your child is and who she is with.

I've no scientific data to show for this, but I'm pretty sure that phones are detrimental to child development. Schools are filled with braindead children who spent their whole classes texting on their phones (anecdotal evidence from several teachers of mine). And this is getting worse, because the average age at which children are given their first cell phone is decreasing. You probably wouldn't give your children unrestricted access to television, I guess. Why allow them unrestricted access to a screen then ?

Kids not fitting into their peer group Well, considering the toxic environment that most schools are, your kid will probably get picked on anyway (for whichever superficial reason, because kids are significantly sensitive to peer pressure and thus tend to follow the most vocal and most horrible of their peer groups).

As Louis C.K. says it: "Just because the other stupid kids have phones doesn't mean that, OK, my kid has to be stupid otherwise she'll feel weird"

Klinky6• 13 years ago

What with the low cost of cellphone service and the high cost of raising a child, I find it hard to believe that parents don't at least equip their child with a feature phone that allows voice and text. It allows you to:

A) Check in at will with your child. B) Have them communicate if they missed a bus or are getting a ride home with a friend. C) Tell you they messed up and are out after dark with friends on the wrong side of town and really need a ride home.

Those factors alone seem to outweigh the negatives to me.

As far as phones and school, it just sounds like cellphones are the new scourge being blamed for things the previous generation doesn't like or understand, just like music, RPGs, TV, and video games were.

Kids can be cruel, but calling the understanding of technology and social networking in the 21st century "stupid" seems shortsighted. Especially when parents/adults are some of the heaviest users of social media.

hooande• 13 years ago

I find it hard to disagree with Louis on this one. Overstimulation is a thing, and we live in a culture where the common case is for a room full of people to be staring at hunks of plastic instead of talking to one another. Let's be honest, given cellphones children are most likely to cyberbully, sext and drastically increase the intensity of the social feedback loop that is adolescence.

Internet access in any form factor can be a gateway to all of the world's knowledge, but the majority of people don't use 4G connections for high minded purposes. I personally have a hard time coming up with a case where an internet connected cell phone is absolutely necessary for anything. In my experience I've usually been able to wait until I get home (with the exception of looking up lost directions).

All of that being said, I don't think cellphones will bring about the end of childhood. "If everybody else is doing it..." isn't the worst argument when it comes to teenaged children, especially for larger values of "everyone else". If cellphones are truly harmful to child development then we're all screwed anyway. The overwhelming majority of teenagers have phones now... what's the point of one person teaching their kids how to communicate the old fashioned way if everybody else in the world is glued to a small screen?

Like everything else that children will be exposed to, cellphones are a matter of self control. It seems like it would be better to have long two way conversations with children about how to socialize properly and how they can be better than their tech-addicted friends. It's possible that forbidding the phone is a parenting easy out. It could take more time and effort to raise children who can resist the siren call of facebook updates.

We shouldn't confuse nostalgia for strong values. There has to be a balance between standing up for what we believe in as parents and giving children an experience that's consistent with the century that they were born in.

mmagin• 13 years ago

I'm kind of glad I didn't have a cell phone until I was 23. That's right around the point they became really mainstream, not just for the business types or the heavy telephone users. When you could get crazy replacement phone cases for your Nokia in Chinatown with trademark-infringing graphics on them.

But I digress. It definitely feels like most people inherently tend toward having difficulty moderating their use of any technology that has a tight reward feedback loop.

I think the interesting question here is whether giving kids a mobile phone enhances their psychological 'immune system' as an adult, or whether it just instills these patterns of almost-addictive mobile phone use earlier on at an age when it's more important to be learning basic facts, developing critical thinking skills, and developing creative ability.

Louis C.K.: I won't let my kids have cell phones

Related Stories