Is low-tech the ultimate privilege? Taking teenagers offline at the world’s most famous school suggests that living without the internet is a new status symbol.
Eton bans smartphones for new pupils
Is low-tech the ultimate privilege? Taking teenagers offline at the world's most famous school suggests that living without the internet is a new status symbol.
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.
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 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
Lower-income 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. 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. 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 the 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 lower income families 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.
Eton bans smartphones for new pupils
