Seine-Port is introducing restrictions on phone use in streets, shops and parks – but young people say there’s little else to do

A picture of a smartphone with a red line through it serves as a warning in the window of a hairdresser’s shop in a French village that has voted to ban people scrolling on their phones in public. “Everyone is struggling with too much screen time,” said Ludivine, a cardiology nurse, as she had her hair cut into a bob, leaving her phone out of sight in her bag. “I voted in favour, this could be a solution.”

Seine-Port, in the Seine-et-Marne area south of Paris, with a population of fewer than 2,000 people, last weekend voted yes in a referendum to restrict smartphone use in public, banning adults and children from scrolling on their devices while walking down the street, while sitting with others on a park bench, while in shops, cafes or eating in restaurants and while parents wait for their children in front of the school gates. Those who might check their phone’s map when lost are instead being encouraged to ask for directions.

The village has also approved a charter for families on children’s use of screens: no screens of any kind in the morning, no screens in bedrooms, no screens before bed or during meals. If parents of teenagers sign a written agreement not to give their child a smartphone before the age of 15, the town hall will provide the child with an old-fashioned handset for calls only.

  • andrewta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    il y a 10 mois

    I disagree with the part about "if every single person votes for it ", if absolutely every single person votes for it, then that is the town they want. Why shouldn’t they be able to have the town they want? Who are we to tell them they can’t have the town they want? In my opinion even a super majority would suffice. By super majority I mean 70%-75%.

    If it were just the city council voting on it then I’d have to look a lot closer at it, but again if the majority of the public wants it then why not?

    Edit : as for the part about no smart phones in the bedroom or home, it also says if the parents agree to it, then the kids would get a free flip phone. It doesn’t say they can’t have it at all.

    • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      il y a 10 mois

      Because it’s not valid to vote to take away basic human rights, like the freedom to use simple, necessary modern tools.

    • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      il y a 10 mois

      If every single person wants it wouldn’t they all already be doing it? It would make no sense to make a law for something everyone is already doing.

      • andrewta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        il y a 10 mois

        Fair, but I also have the super majority listed because you will basically never hit 100% of people wanting something.