Picture the scene. A billionaire is sitting on a yacht when her phone rings. The screen is black-and-white. The keyboard only has the numbers 0-9. No maps, no apps, no internet explorer. There is not even a camera.

More and more wealthy people are finding ways to disconnect. Companies have even started selling luxury "dumbphones" for hundreds of pounds.

Now Eton College, the famous all-boys boarding school, has banned smartphones for new pupils. Instead, they will be given a simple Nokia handset to make calls and send messages.

In a letter to parents, the school's deputy head explained the reason for this. He recognised the importance of smartphones for teenagers, but warned about the risks of "overuse, and the impact on mental and physical health".¹

Most state schools in the UK already forbid the use of phones during the day. But Eton banning smartphones outside the classroom shows that spending less time on screens is now a sign of privilege.

A 2019 study showed that children from affluent families have more access to technology, but use it less often. Lower-income teenagers spent over 8.5 hours a day on smartphones, tablets and video games, compared with six hours and 49 minutes for their higher-income peers.²

Poorer parents may not have the time or money to keep their children entertained with activities. As the headmaster of one state school explained: "Only middle-class families can pay £20 for an after-school football club."³

But smartphones can also benefit children. Education apps can help with learning a language or solving maths problems, while maps and location tracking reassure parents.

Yes, there are reports of smartphones and social media damaging mental health. But, according to developmental psychologist Candice Odgers, the idea that digital technologies are causing "an epidemic of loneliness" is not supported by science.⁴

Many teenagers worry that not having a smartphone will limit their social lives. But research suggests that shared experiences bring more joy than owning objects.⁵ The real privilege is spending time with other people, rather than sitting indoors and staring at a screen.

Is low-tech the ultimate privilege?

Yes: The fact that expensive private schools are banning smartphones shows that they do more harm than good. Lower-income families cannot afford to have low-tech lives.

No: The evidence on the effect of smartphones on young people is unclear. But education apps might help the children of lower income families to catch up with their more privileged peers.

Or... We know that young people who spend time outside with friends are more healthy and happy. That should be the focus for parents and schools, whatever their phone policy.