There is no such thing as “internet addiction”

“Internet addiction” is the latest threat to civilization, the drug consuming our children, the story that the traditional media love to warn us about.

The problem is that there is no evidence, nor has the medical profession identified any kind of pathology. There is, however, lack of discipline applied by parents and teachers, along with a device, the multifunctional, versatile smartphone.

Are there people “addicted to the internet”? No. Regardless of how often we hear it, it does not exist, at least according to the American Psychiatric Association, which has refused for years to include this absurd invention despite the pressures of those trying to make money curing that supposed disorder. The Royal College of Psychiatrists has never included it in its International Classification of Diseases, and this is known to addiction specialists.

Are there people who use the internet too much? Too much compared to what? There are possibly cases of overuse, as there were people who used to watch too much television or spent their time on a single activity. In the case of the smartphone, a person who looks at their device every few minutes, a symptom that seems to frighten some people, may be playing a game, communicating, monitoring the price of a share, watching the weather, looking at a map, taking or retouching a photograph, reading a newspaper or a book, listening to music, learning about French politics through a chatbot, looking at photos of friends, checking the time, buying a movie ticket, paying for parking ticket, booking a restaurant, consulting a train or plane ticket, translating a text, asking for a taxi, and a very long etc. Addicted to what exactly? To life?

The internet is a medium, not an activity as such, although many people who were born before the internet can’t see the difference. If you spend a lot of time gambling online, you may lose a lot of money, but what you will have, as any psychiatrist can certify, is an addiction to gambling, not an “addiction to the internet”. If you spend hours shopping on the internet, you may have an addiction to shopping, but in no way an “internet addiction”. Talking about “internet addiction” is as absurd as talking about “street addiction”: the internet is a vehicle, not a condition. We can talk about addictions to substances, behavioral addictions, and even how some behaviors that might lead to addiction can be develop through the internet, in the same way they used to be developed through other means; but not “internet addiction” as such. Please, stop the nonsense.

What’s the problem with taking our smartphone out more than a certain number of times a day? Is it weird to feel uncomfortable when there is no access to the internet, when the internet is one of the most appropriate and convenient ways of relating to the world? For what stupid reason has a means of communication come to define me as “addicted”? Who are the crooks trying to make money by inventing a disease, and then offering cures and miracle therapies to cure it? What interest does a television channel have in defining smartphone use as an “addiction”, other than getting us to spend more time viewing their content?

Are there addicts? Of course: people can develop an addiction to just about anything. Fortunately, however, they account for a very small percentage of the population. Are there any gambling addicts? Yes, there have always been, and possibly, the fact that it is now possible to gamble online, avoiding many of the previous social constraints, we may see an increase in the problem. Are there otakus who become obsessed with a game and stop going out or seeing people? Yes, but that is not a problem related to the internet as such, and much less internet addiction, and the term itself has lost almost all of the pejorative connotations it once had.

As parents we will have to be sure to teach our children that there is a time and a place for everything and that they must manage their priorities. They cannot play all day, they cannot spend all day catching up with their friends, and they cannot avoid certain obligations because they are doing more enjoyable things. We will have to teach them what our parents taught us: that it isn’t possible to play all day, or spend the whole visit to our grandparents looking out of the window and not saying a word. In short, upbringing.

Some people seem to think that children can bring themselves up, or perhaps they just can’t be bothered. If the kids start acting up, stick a smartphone in front of them. Later on, they’ll complain that their children are “addicted”: no, what they are is ill-mannered.

These parents talk about “internet addiction” because that conveniently relieves them of the responsibility of bringing up their children: “I would, but I cannot, because they are addicts,” they say. Sure.

“Internet addiction”? No such thing. The idea is totally stupid, a simplistic and reductionist idea, an atavistic reflex that we should put to sleep as fast as we can. Forget about “addiction” and learn to take advantage of technology, and teach your children how to do so too.

(En espa?ol, aquí)