As school districts nationwide sue social media companies, parents and teachers grapple with cell phone use by kids

Nearly a dozen Long Island school districts have joined a federal class action lawsuit charging that social media giants, including Meta (Facebook, Instagram) TikTok and Snapchat are having an “addictive and dangerous” and harmful impact on youngsters.

The Riverhead Board of Education voted to join the lawsuit in December. Other Suffolk County school districts in the suit are Brentwood, East Islip, Kings Park, Port Jefferson, Islip and South Huntington.

The lawsuit is part of a national legal effort by school systems.

And it comes as U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy has announced he would push for a warning label on social media platforms advising that they might present a “risk of harm to the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents.” There would be labels like those now appearing on tobacco and alcohol products. 

Murthy is recommending that parents set limits on cellphone use by their children, that Congress act to deal with platforms that “prey on developing brains and contribute to excessive use,” and that companies behind the platforms make changes.

“I don’t think we can solely rely on the hope that the platforms can fix this problem on their own,” said Murthy. “They’ve had 20 years.”

In February, the New York City administration of Mayor Eric Adams filed a lawsuit charging that Tik Tok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat and YouTube platforms were designed to “purposely manipulate and addict children and teens to social media applications.”

And last year, New York Attorney General Letitia James and 32 other state attorneys general filed a lawsuit charging that Meta, Facebook’s parent company, purposely installed “addictive” features. James claimed that Meta has “profited from children’s pain.”

In May, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced she wants to explore a “compromise”—a ban on internet access by students on cellphones, but otherwise allowing cellphone use in school. 

“If you want to reach your parents because there’s an emergency [such as] you forgot your lunch money, you can communicate, if it’s essential,” said Hochul. “But to have access to the whole internet while you’re supposed to be in class is a different question.”

And last week, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin issued an executive order to have the state limit or ban cell phone use in schools. “Creating cell phone and social-media free educational environments in Virginia’s K-12 education system will benefit students, parents and educators,” he said. He directed the Virginia Department of Education to establish guidelines with a “clear goal to protect the health and safety of our students by limiting the amount of time they are exposed to addictive cell phones and social media and eliminate clear distractions in the classroom.”

A Pew Research Center report issued this month found that 72% of high school teachers in the U.S. regard cell phone use as a “major problem in the classroom.”

In Suffolk County, several school districts have been considering or have initiated bans on using cellphones in the classroom. Cell phone use in schools has been barred in countries including France, Finland, China, Italy, Portugal, United Kingdom, Sweden and the Netherlands.

As for me, I’ll be starting my Fall 2024 classes at the State University of New York at Old Westbury at the end of August and again tangling with a problem that didn’t exist when I began as a journalism professor there 46 years ago.

Now I need to add to my syllabi the passage: “Smartphones and similar electronic devices, because they divert a student’s attention, are not to be used during class. Please put your smartphone or similar device away and forget about texting or checking on email during class.”

I find my iPhone indispensable—indeed, when I misplace it, anxiety sets in until I happily locate it. But, as I verbally tell the students, voicing compassion for their digital pause, I don’t think using a smart phone in class is OK due to its interference with learning. 

The British magazine The New Scientist ran a lead editorial last month headlined “Smart solutions” with a sub-head: “Phased introductions to cellphones and social media would help kids more than bans.” 

It began: “’Get phones out of schools.’ ‘Social media is toxic for teenagers.’ Messages like these are flying around the globe and seem to have reached a zenith of late. In the UK, concern over harms from social media and screen time have led to the Smartphone Free Childhood campaign and a government crackdown on smartphone use in schools. Ministers are even considering banning the sale of smartphones to under-16s.”

It noted Murthy’s call “for cigarette style warning labels on social media platforms” and said: “More than 40 percent of U.S. children have a smartphone by the age of 10, and the concern is that excess screen use can lead to health problems, including obesity, sleep disturbances, depression and anxiety.” 

The New Scientist continued: “A smarter way forward would be to give children access, even from a young age, but in a controlled and considered manner. Imagine what a smartphone utopia would look like. It would be phased—you wouldn’t give kids access to the entire internet at first, you would let them into walled gardens.” The magazine said “you would allow limited messaging with strict moderation that relaxes with age.”

Is that a sensible, workable plan—or unrealistic, a fantasy?

“Smartphones, social media and screens are here to stay in our children’s lives,” said the New Scientist, “no matter how many warning labels are put in place. Now is the time to think seriously about how to provide the tools they need to navigate the reality of growing up online.”