Writing a Full Response

I am writing in response to the article on teenagers’ screen time published in your newspaper. The article raises an important issue, since the effects of digital media on young people should clearly not be ignored. At the same time, however, the argument seems too narrow because it mainly presents teenagers as passive victims of technology. A more convincing discussion should ask not only how much time young people spend online, but also how they can be guided towards a more responsible use of digital media.

The writer is certainly right to stress that excessive screen use can become a real problem. Many teenagers do struggle to find a healthy balance between online and offline life, and adults should not simply ignore that fact. However, the article seems to assume that stricter control by parents and schools is the only reasonable answer. This is where the argument becomes less convincing, because it reduces a complex issue to a question of discipline alone.

One reason why this view is too limited is that digital media are not only a source of distraction but also a space for communication, learning and participation. Teenagers use online platforms to stay in contact with friends, organise their lives and access information in ways that are often highly relevant to them. If adults focus only on restriction, they risk ignoring these positive functions. Instead of treating technology mainly as a threat, parents and teachers should help young people reflect on how to use it more consciously and responsibly.

A further problem with the article’s position is that control alone rarely leads to lasting change. Young people are far more likely to develop better habits when they understand why balance matters than when they simply face more rules. What matters here is not simply limiting access, but creating situations in which teenagers learn to judge their own behaviour critically. A more constructive approach would therefore combine clear boundaries with open discussion, explanation and trust.

The broader issue, then, is how society understands young people’s relationship to the digital world. Rather than asking only whether teenagers spend too much time online, we should also ask what skills they need in order to use digital spaces well. This debate ultimately reflects a larger question about education itself: whether it should mainly enforce obedience or prepare young people to act responsibly and independently. In that sense, the article’s argument seems too narrow for a challenge that is clearly much wider.

For these reasons, the issue deserves a more balanced discussion than the article provides. What is needed is not simply stricter control, but guidance that takes both the risks and the opportunities of digital life seriously. If adults want to help young people, they should aim not only to limit harmful behaviour, but also to strengthen reflection, responsibility and judgement. I hope this perspective adds to the discussion.