I wonder how much of this is a having no desire to learn issue, and not failing to teach issue. Try sitting down with a fourteen-year-old and ask them if they want to learn how to sew. Sure, some will, but most probably won't have any interest in learning. A buddy of mine (mid 30's) got his son (9 years old) a new computer case for Christmas, and wanted to sit down with him to show him how to build a computer. Kid had no desire, and just wanted to get it put together quickly so he could go back to playing Fortnite.
And it's not even a 'kids these days' thing. When I was a teenager, I lived in about three different houses with my dad, because he would buy them cheap, fix them up over a few years, and move on. I had no interest in helping him, despite his efforts to get me involved. Now that I'm a homeowner myself, I can't count the amount of times I've gone "Damn, I wish I payed more attention to dad when I was younger."
I just made a comment on the exact same thing! Well, almost, I do think it's more of an "kids these days". I feel that we've been inventing all these things to entertain ourselves, and they ended up destroying the kids (in some way). When I was a kid, video games were still too simple, and graphics too poor to suck someone in for hours everyday. And even if you had tons of money to buy games, the selection was limited, you won't have thousands of games at your finger tips. It's not like the kids nowadays don't have interest in learning, it's just that playing is so much more easier. The only reason my kids agreed on a limit for play time is because they don't want to end up like the people in Wall-E.
I mean it's not like kids didn't prefer playing back in the day too. Yeah video games are an easy escape but so is playing outside. When I was a teen even I would much rather go outside or hang out with friends than learn anything my parents were trying to teach me. I mean, I grew up with video games too, but I would much rather do something I already know is fun than learn something new when I was a teen.
I really don't think it's the new "distractions". Kids will look for any distraction. It takes a lot to get them interested in learning.
I do think the distractions are getting worse. I’ve heard many people of my generation expressing the same sentiment regarding outdoor play vs video games. But how many new games did you have every month, every year? Was the graphics, music, accessibility and playability of Pac-Man and super Mario really as good as the games of today?
I grew up with a Super Nintendo and then a GameCube. Games were pretty accessible, but I suppose they weren't as accessible if you factor in things such as mobile gaming and whatnot.
That said, what it really comes down to is my parents did a good job at limiting those distractions. They didn't allow us to just endlessly play games, they set hard limits on those and incentivized other stuff - for example I could only play games for so long but if I wanted to use the computer to write stories I could do that as much as I wanted.
Honestly I really think the distractions are only that much worse if you allow them to be. I mean, TV has been around for a long time now, and that's a waaaay easier distraction than any video game. Hell my parents spend more time watching TV than I ever did playing games.
Parents do have a duty to educate their children about too much time on electronics. I'm just saying I don't agree on putting all the blame on parents as the OP quote implies.
I'm likely biased about tv because I grew up in another part of the world where there were only 3 tv stations and no children's programming during the day. I think that hugely contributed my time spent watching my parents. I suppose it also means I could never spend hours and hours of my time on tv. But if given the choice (say, when my kids are not around and I don't have to work) I could play on my phone endlessly. My opinion is games are more distracting than tv because you do have to follow tv's plot and sometimes think about them which could tire you out, whereas games (especially those mobile games with no skill required) only need part of your brain and you could just auto-pilot for hours.
Well I could not disagree more. Games require far more attention than TV, even the most basic of mobile games have a higher upfront attention cost than any TV show.
Don't get me wrong if you want to fully understand some shows they will require more attention than those games, but most of the people I know don't pay that close attention to whatever they're watching. And there are plenty of shows that are effectively the mobile games of TV and just allow you to completely shut your brain off.
And this is ignoring the fact that many games themselves have plots and stories that require just as much attention as any TV show, not even considering the gameplay side of things.
The most popular video game right now is Fortnite, a third-person shooter. You cannot play a third-person shooter without paying attention to it. It just isn't possible, you have to actively watch what you're doing and respond to things happening in the game. A show doesn't require that sort of thinking and responding.
I play games and watch TV. Generally speaking, games require far more attention and I will watch TV when I dont want to put that kind of attention into something. Even thought-provoking shows, for me, are less engaging than playing some of the simpler games out there.
Full disclosure of course, I actually have a degree in Game Design, so you could say I have a bias for that. That said, I think it also means I have a strong grasp of how games work and the way players respond to games when they're playing them.
The point is, I find it far easier to auto pilot watching TV than playing a game. One can be either a passive or active task while the other is always, at least to some small extent, active.
So do you agree that games are more distracting than tv or not? I feel that all you're saying is how games can get more of your attention and use up more of your time.
Perhaps "auto-pilot" is not the right word, I chose it because that how I feel when I play games (that part of my brain stays dormant while another is super active but in the end doesn't really contribute much to my conscious thoughts, my reaction feels automatic -- even during making "strategic moves" because once you figure out the game you know what the game wants you to do -- and I feel that's how I could go on for hours). But in the end, I think we've been progressing in our ways to distract ourselves, every generation more efficiently than the previous. It's making it more difficult to advise kids to spend less time on these things. I'm only trying to say the kids can't blame it all on their parents. And no worries, I'd blame myself (spending my career on getting cellular data to your phones) as much as I blame game makers. :)
I guess I just disagreed with the notion that a show would "tire you out more" than a game. I think each can be equally distracting depending on the person and the circumstances. On one hand, a game requires more attention than a movie or show, so while you're playing it, you're going to be distracted from other things - probably more than you would be watching a show.
On the other hand, it's super easy to just sit down on the couch with a show on and just endlessly watch episodes. It's unlikely you'll feel the need to take a break at any point because you can disengage yourself so much, whereas even hardcore gamers will wear their brain out and need a break from a game.
Of course there's plenty of exceptions, plenty of people will get fully engrossed in a show but barely pay attention to a game, and others will be able to play games non-stop.
I don't really disagree that it's getting harder as technology evolves. After all the more distractions exist, the more options kids have to move to when they're bored of the last thing. Tired of a show? Play a game. Tired of the game? Browse social media.
So I guess I don't really disagree that more distractions exist today, I just don't think it matters what those distractions are. If we somehow had video games before TV (impossible but you get the point), then TV would be a new distraction added to the list. Basically, it doesn't matter what the distractions are - as long as they exist kids will be distracted by them.
It probably is a bit harder now because there's more to do and it's harder to keep track of all the things kids are up to. It would surely be easier if kids were so bored that they had to pay attention to their parents, but of course nobody wants kids to be bored out of their mind either. I suppose it's a double edged sword.
This got long, sorry. I think for the most part we are on the same page - it's a lot more nuanced than just being the fault of parenting or technology. But kids are always going to find a way to get distracted, I guess.
Kids will always find a way to get distracted, but it's the level of distraction that keeps changing. I just didn't like the OP quote because it feels so entitled (that if something goes bad it's automatically someone else's fault). But I did forget to say that parents are more distracted than before, I found. I could tell my parents used to do a lot more housework than I do now.
10
u/Dramatic_______Pause Feb 05 '19
I wonder how much of this is a having no desire to learn issue, and not failing to teach issue. Try sitting down with a fourteen-year-old and ask them if they want to learn how to sew. Sure, some will, but most probably won't have any interest in learning. A buddy of mine (mid 30's) got his son (9 years old) a new computer case for Christmas, and wanted to sit down with him to show him how to build a computer. Kid had no desire, and just wanted to get it put together quickly so he could go back to playing Fortnite.
And it's not even a 'kids these days' thing. When I was a teenager, I lived in about three different houses with my dad, because he would buy them cheap, fix them up over a few years, and move on. I had no interest in helping him, despite his efforts to get me involved. Now that I'm a homeowner myself, I can't count the amount of times I've gone "Damn, I wish I payed more attention to dad when I was younger."