The world is increasingly obsessed with screen time, and the debate over its impact on our lives is raging. On one side are the screen time maximalists, who spend an inordinate amount of time on their phones, often with a sense of purpose and control. Take Morgan Dreiss, a copy editor with severe ADHD who averages 18 hours and 55 minutes of screen time daily. They read books from the library app Libby and play mobile games, even earning money by logging hours. While studies have raised concerns about the negative effects of excessive screen time on physical and cognitive health, particularly among young people, there are those who resist the emerging common wisdom. These "screenmaxxers" argue that the general alarm over screen time distorts the issues at hand, and that screens are merely a medium that should be regulated in terms of content and use.
Corina Diaz, a video game marketer in a remote forested region of Ontario, Canada, works long hours and has a newborn, leading to increased screen time. She has sought friendships online since the 1990s and sees screens as a way to connect with niche social groups. Daniel Rios, a computer programmer who lives in a non-city area, relies on screens for social interaction and entertainment, finding it hard to quantify his screen time. Brooke Williams, a UX designer in the San Francisco Bay Area, uses her phone for hypervigilance and a sense of control, despite occasional annoyance from loved ones.
These screenmaxxers argue that the warnings about screen time are overblown and that it's a symptom of larger societal issues. They see screens as a tool that can be regulated to deliver beneficial content and support accessibility, education, and socialization. However, the debate over screen time continues, and it's unlikely that everyone will agree on the best approach. While some may seek to reduce their screen time, others are content with the infinite scroll, adapted for this digital world.
