Review on the essay "Your Kids Phone is Not Like a Cigarette" in the New York Times by Anya Kamanetz

the overwhelming impact of cell phones on kids

The concept of cell phones couldn't be fathomed 20 years ago. Nowadays they're a part of everyday life. It is disputed that they are far more than a part of everyday life, rather, it is a severe addiction that is way more serious than most anticipated. That is the argument of Anya Kamenetz in her piece "Your Kids Phone is Not Like a Cigarette" in New York Times. Her basic argument is essentially that we, as a nation, cannot handle phone addiction as we did with cigarettes. She discusses that cell phone addiction can be more dangerous and way different from tobacco addiction. She essentially discusses the potential issues with young children, they tell the kids tobacco is bad and yet they never say anything about phones and such.

Kamenetz isn't the only person that thinks that, in "Phone Addiction is Real" by Alice Walton, she takes Kamenetz's side while releasing some pretty mind blowing statistics. She says: "The CDC had noted a rise in the rates of both over the years 2010-2015, and found that girls were particularly at risk: Their suicide rate rose by 65% in those five years. The number of girls with severe depression rose by 58%." (Walton). This quote shows the severity of the addiction now. Suicide and depression rates are rising exponentially and people standing by and no action being taken. It makes sense the argument with the tobacco is that you should never start it to be addicted to it, however it is almost impossible not to start to use phones, they are such an integral part of society, you'd almost be rendered useless without it. Another statistic shown is "About 48% of those who spent five or more hours a day on their phones-a lot of time by any measure-had thought about suicide or made plans for it, vs. 28% of those who spent only one hour per day on their phones." This statistic is an obvious correlation between phone use and depression/suicide. The ones who spent far more time on the phone are more likely to think about or commit suicide than those who don't. It has been studied the brains of those involved with high levels of phone use are different from those who don't.

More people than that agree with Kamenetz than just Walton, on a source called Psychguides they give some statistics that are quite shocking. "90% of American adults own a cell phone, and while this may not be a problem for many people, many people develop an addiction to their mobile device." (Psychguides). This statistic shows the overwhelming amount of the population that actually owns a cellular device. While not all of these people are addicted, it's still absurd amount of people. A statistic that shows the wide variety of effects cell phone use has on people is "Cell phone addiction has been linked to an increase in sleep disorders and fatigue in users." This statistic shows that cell phones don't only lead to depression rather also sleep disturbances which can lead to multiple more disorders and effects.

Another source to support this argument is Brenda Priddy's discussion of the impact it has on the children who use cell phones regularly. She references studies and surveys conducted on children recently one reads: "A member of the Kwon civic group in South Korea, Kim Nam-Hee, asked a classroom of 10 year old students compare the hours they spend on their smartphones with the time they spend interacting with relatives. She found a disturbing gap between the amount of digital and human interaction they were engaging in." (Priddy). This quote shows the impact on children in recent history. How they will be lacking social constructs for a lifetime because they're so addicted to non- social behavior. It really is a mind blowing concept of how different the generations to come will be.

Overall it is seen how her claim can and has been supported by evidence and by other sources. Her comments, while debatable, are mostly factual and backed up with evidence from other sources. She would happen to agree with many of the other authors referenced here. She is simply aiming to inform others on the issues with phone addiction and she did a good job of it.

Work Cited:

Kamenetz, Anya. "Your Kids Phone Is Not Like a Cigarette." The New York Times

Walton, Alice G. "Phone Addiction Is Real -- And So Are Its Mental Health Risks." Forbes

"Cell Phone Addiction Signs and Symptoms."

Priddy, Brenda. "The Growing Problem Of Smartphone Addiction."

Matt, for an article review of a New York Times article, there is almost no reference to the article itself nor a proper review coming from other connected sources and your personal opinion. The secondary author who agreed with Kamanetz needs to be quoted in direct relation to her approval of what was sain the previous article in order to prove that this second author is truly in agreement with the first author. The same goes for the psychguide reference. Where is the information that says it is directly connected with the previous article? There isn't any. So your review actually turns into a research paper that is focused on the topic of phone addiction rather than the review of the New York Times article. This makes the paper incorrect as a review of the article. You need to focus more on the original article in this "review" so that the focus of the information being discussed in relation to those that agree with the writer becomes more relevant. By the way, you need to show an opposing argument as well in order to provide a balance review of the article.