Menu
Vallaud-Belkacem's central argument lies in the need to rethink our relationship with screens and the Internet. She highlights the many facets of this issue, from health, to environmental and social concerns. The former French Education Minister argues that reducing our exposure to screens would have positive repercussions on crucial aspects of our lives, such as mental health, productivity, and the fight against online discrimination and harassment.
By restricting access to the Internet, Vallaud-Belkacem would hope to encourage a more mindful and conscious use of technology. She suggests that this measure would encourage individuals to be more selective in their online activities, promoting more productive and less compulsive use of screens. In addition, she argues that reducing our digital footprint could help mitigate the growing environmental impact of the IT sector.
However, the proposal to ration the Internet does not come without its share of challenges. On a practical level, it is difficult to implement such a system of control and surveillance without encroaching on individual freedoms and privacy. Moreover, the distinction between business and personal uses of the Internet poses additional challenges, as does the prevalence of circumvention tools such as virtual private networks (VPNs).
Vallaud-Belkacem's proposal quickly elicited contrasting reactions. While some welcomed her initiative as a step in the right direction to tackle the problems associated with digital overconsumption, others criticized the feasibility and relevance of such a measure. Marina Ferrari, French Secretary of State for the Digital Economy, in particular expressed reservations about Vallaud-Belkacem's "Manichean" approach, highlighting the complexity of the contemporary digital landscape.
At the heart of this debate is the issue of screen addiction, a phenomenon that is affecting more and more individuals, young and old alike. Internet rationing could potentially serve as a preventive measure to limit this addiction and promote healthier, more balanced habits of use. Some figures don't lie: according to several studies, from the age of 2, a child already spends almost 3 hours in front of a screen every day! Between the ages of 8 and 12, it's nearly 4 hours 45 minutes... Between the ages of 13 and 18, it's 6 hours 45 minutes! So how can we regulate this precious time for the development of children and teenagers?
Another important dimension of this proposal is its link with the carbon footprint of the digital age. Indeed, the growing consumption of online data contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing Internet consumption could therefore have a positive impact on the fight against climate change, by reducing the CO2 emissions generated by data centers and network infrastructures.
Beyond the immediate controversies surrounding the proposed rationing of the internet, it is essential to engage in an in-depth debate about our digital lifestyles and their long-term implications. This requires critical reflection on how we use technology and the adjustments needed to promote a balance between the advantages and disadvantages of the digital age.
Ultimately, Vallaud-Belkacem's proposal underlines the urgency of reassessing our relationship with technology. While its implementation may be complex and controversial, perhaps it paves the way for an essential dialogue on how we wish to shape our digital future. What if, by carefully examining the challenges and opportunities posed by this proposal, we might be able to define a more balanced and sustainable approach to our use of the internet and screens?
The question is real and symbolic of our times.
What do you think?
