On a grey Tuesday morning, twelve-year-old Amira sat at the kitchen table, her cereal slowly dissolving into a soggy spiral. Her mother was speaking to her about a forgotten permission slip, but Amira’s eyes were fixed downward, her thumb moving in quick, practised flicks across the glowing surface of her phone. A video ended, another began.
“Amira,” her mother said again, her tone sharper this time. Amira looked up, startled, as though pulled from underwater. For a moment, she seemed unsure of where she was.
Scenes like this have become commonplace in nearly every household. The devices are small, the gestures minimal, yet the absorption is total. What was just a decade ago described as “screen time” has become difficult to delimit, especially among children. Social media exerts constant pressure on children’s identities and emotional lives.
The word addiction is increasingly applied to this phenomenon, sometimes loosely, sometimes with clinical precision. Critics argue that the term risks exaggeration and conflates habit with pathology. But researchers studying behavioural addiction point to familiar patterns: compulsive use despite negative consequences, withdrawal-like symptoms when access is restricted, and a narrowing of interests in favour of the activity in question. In children, whose cognitive and emotional regulation systems are still developing, these patterns can emerge rapidly.
Part of the difficulty lies in the design of the platforms. Social media apps use algorithms and psychological insights to capture and retain attention. Infinite scrolling eliminates natural stopping cues; intermittent rewards—likes, comments, new content—arrive unpredictably, mimicking reinforcement schedules associated with gambling. Clinicians in India and elsewhere increasingly emphasise that addiction is not defined by hours alone but by loss of control and compulsion, even when consequences are clear.
The global nature of the phenomenon can obscure its local textures. In India, where hundreds of millions of young people come online through inexpensive smartphones, social media has become deeply embedded in daily life. The Economic Survey of India recently described digital addiction as a significant public health concern, noting the scale and intensity of usage among its youth. What distinguishes the Indian context is not only the sheer number of users but also the speed with which social media has intertwined with aspirations, education, and social mobility.
India has its story too. A boy identified in a clinical report as Rishi—his name changed for privacy—began, at twelve, much as Amira had: chatting with friends, sharing pictures, watching videos. The platforms blurred together—gaming conversations spilt into social media feeds, which, in turn, fed back into schoolyard interactions. Over time, his usage stretched to ten, then twelve hours a day. He posted frequently, checking and rechecking for responses, trying to decipher the meaning of each like or its absence. When his parents attempted to intervene, he reacted with anger, even aggression.
Rishi’s case, documented by doctors at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, is not unusual. Clinicians note that excessive social media use among children often reflects deeper emotional currents—loneliness, anxiety, or difficulty forming relationships offline. But the platforms amplify these vulnerabilities, creating a feedback loop in which online validation becomes both a remedy and a source of distress. Adolescents, still forming their sense of self, are particularly susceptible to the distortions of curated digital life, where every image is a fragment, and every fragment is polished.
The pressures are not merely psychological. At times, they are physical. In recent reports from Indian newspapers, teenagers have risked—and sometimes lost—their lives attempting to capture attention online, staging dangerous stunts for short-form videos in pursuit of views and likes. These incidents, involving accidents, drownings, and fatal falls, illustrate how the logic of virality can spill beyond the screen into the body itself. The pursuit of visibility, once largely symbolic, takes on a literal, and sometimes lethal, dimension.
Even in less extreme cases, the consequences accumulate quietly. Studies in India and globally have linked heavy social media use among young people to anxiety, depression, sleep disruption, and impaired academic performance. The direction of causality remains complex: children who are already struggling may be drawn to screens, while prolonged exposure can deepen those struggles. Researchers describe this as a bidirectional relationship, one that resists simple explanations or solutions.
Sleep, as in Amira’s case, often becomes the first casualty. Many children keep their devices within reach at night, engaging in a form of low-grade vigilance—waiting for messages, responding to notifications, scrolling through endless feeds. The boundary between day and night erodes, giving way to a continuous stream of stimuli. Over time, fatigue seeps into other areas of life, affecting mood, concentration, and resilience.
But it would be misleading to cast social media solely as a force of harm. For many children, including those in India, it offers opportunities for creativity, learning, and connection that would otherwise be inaccessible. Young users teach themselves editing skills, discover communities of shared interest, and encounter perspectives beyond their immediate surroundings. In contexts where educational resources may be unevenly distributed, these platforms can serve as informal classrooms, however imperfect.
This duality complicates any attempt at intervention. Governments have considered age restrictions and digital curfews; some Indian states have proposed limiting access for younger users. But experts caution that bans alone are unlikely to succeed, noting that children may migrate to other platforms or create accounts beyond parental oversight. Effective approaches tend to focus on underlying causes—emotional well-being, social support, and the cultivation of habits that extend beyond the screen.
Parents, meanwhile, navigate a landscape that is at once familiar and unprecedented. They recognise the signs of compulsion—irritability, withdrawal, narrowing of interests—but often feel ill-equipped to respond. The strategies they adopt are necessarily provisional: time limits, device-free spaces, shared accounts. What proves most durable, perhaps, is not control but example, the visible demonstration that attention can be directed, withheld, reclaimed.
Amira’s mother, after several fraught months, instituted a simple rule: all phones would be left in the kitchen overnight. The first week was difficult. Amira complained of boredom, of feeling cut off from her friends, of lying awake with nothing to do. But gradually, something shifted. She began to read again, at first reluctantly, then with growing enthusiasm. Her sleep improved. Morning conversations, though still occasionally interrupted by the pull of the screen, became more frequent.
There is no single threshold at which use becomes addiction, no clear boundary separating the healthy from the harmful. The line is negotiated daily through small decisions about when to check, when to stop, and when to look up. For children, those decisions are shaped by forces they only partially understand—by technologies designed to hold their attention, by social systems that reward constant presence, by developmental needs that seek belonging and affirmation.
What emerges, across continents and contexts, is a tension between connection and control. In Delhi, in London, in countless other places, children like Rishi and Amira inhabit a world in which attention is both currency and commodity. To attend to something is, in a sense, to give it a portion of one’s life. The question, then, is not simply how much time they spend online, but what that time displaces and what it makes possible.
On that grey morning, after her mother’s call, Amira set her phone down and took a bite of now-lukewarm cereal. The gesture was small, almost imperceptible. But in its modesty lay a kind of resistance, a reminder that even within systems designed to capture attention, the act of reclaiming it, however briefly, remains within reach.
-30-
Copyright©Madras Courier, All Rights Reserved. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from madrascourier.com and redistribute by email, post to the web, mobile phone or social media.Please send in your feed back and comments to [email protected]
