Alarming Decline of Quality Youth Playtime

Article note: Article is trading structure for different structure instead of addressing the problem. Are kids having high-quality minimally-supervised interactions with low but extant stakes? Then it's developmentally good. Are kids stuck on a rail with no meaningful influence or ability to explore? Then it's likely developmentally a waste of time. This axis has _nothing_ to do with electronic or not. It doesn't matter much if they're locked-in to electronic content or locked-in to a scheduled-and-monitored sports activity, they're not developing from it. It doesn't matter much if they're on a forum or on a stoop with the other neighborhood kids, if they're organically and independently interacting and learning, they're developing. Put some limited supervision on top to make sure they're not learning anything too egregious. I do agree with the assertion at the end that making sure children have opportunities (and nudges) to find and develop their interests is important; there is an awful lot of evidence in the literature that people are unlikely to get deeply into anything they haven't had a positive exposure to before puberty, so supplies and low-stakes classes ... and websites and communities for lots of different activities are the best kind of stimulus.