What to get for someone who loves plants

House plants: They’re chic. They’re natural and eco-friendly. They help clean the air you breathe. If you don’t have at least one plant in your home, we beg you to reconsider, because you’re truly missing out on some good stuff. 

If you have someone in your life whose studio apartment doubles as a plant nursery, the best gift that you can give them is something that’ll benefit their little green darlings (you can always gift yourself, too — we fully support that level of self-care). Of course, we don’t want to leave out our well-intentioned plant-killing cohorts who just can’t seem to keep their photosynthetic friends alive past the first week. Y’all are important and deserving of plant benefits, too. Read more…

More about Plants, Eco Friendly, Mashable Shopping, Plant Accessories, and Culture

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072930%252f34a65812 4f64 488f 933c 9cb795d747d6.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=5x5aeljpkatozxzl0hxxxk6drj4=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



An indoor growing system — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072322%252f7f1b7d8b d662 43d1 939d 5e0c91b15d0a.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=nke 5e5cjh4qudmkmi1iagko990=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A cute little planter set — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1075198%252fbb93040b 4b29 441d b764 e566234ac0ee.jpg%252ffit in  675x0.jpg?signature=ofyhzhlhvwcf5xerpij2823w p0=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



Braided Money Tree — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072327%252ff6d18121 22f0 400f a8cd b1944a4b59dc.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=9yjca61dh76m2uv65pyhwqgnoyg=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A planter that hangs — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072324%252f530ecb22 471a 43db 9580 433c9415f7b1.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature= nre7c0w2gber7bgejpvtrniwt4=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



Or one big planter — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072396%252f0d1a26c8 fefe 4028 8121 bf2859d64b9a.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=vpuxmn5ualmhh mh exto46wzg4=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



An actual living plant — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072403%252f80a20fa5 33b9 4fea b4a4 b3ad83fc30ce.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=pwfis3yu7nkshkh3oey3pg4ltfe=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A gorgeous fake plant — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072409%252fdeed3258 c7e6 4faa b11d f9be28927652.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=a6enyhl62gmkob6 mb3idmacqbg=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A personal herb garden — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072405%252f05a73524 c2a7 4d2a b606 1dc71d8ae66a.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=gs22xkemdvydyb rzetrqrlw7ki=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



Monthly plant shipments — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072421%252f408c2a1d e027 4744 91e3 f7f6c2291f22.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature= yht1nrnitj1jcpgyrmmurypuvm=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A moss ball kit — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072444%252fb6f70487 c07c 4821 af7c 5bd86350b723.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=kdekt8op9aai4cgrhfdkoefhqgm=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A frickin' Venus Flytrap — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072448%252f57f5cf10 7efd 4fd0 8424 556560e58871.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=ltqw3qhy6xtpchlwu8bxgadhcna=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



Dick peppers — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072452%252fa5e1e075 4c4f 4972 8eef 28d60aa36888.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=zcj9z0i2rfbccfxkhizsbnnigry=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A very smol terrarium — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072466%252fc266e338 f62d 41c7 b787 ea11a4f626be.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=oo omsub7vjauacjfyzizwtk8ks=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



Hunky plant guys calendar — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072456%252f52809045 2992 4b26 89d8 2e509b133d56.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=qwdbir zvhy dy72zsmud863hwq=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A Baby Groot Chia Pet — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072468%252fe6b9bf12 817c 4fe9 a4ee 2759e766feb6.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=witmcjpkpf85kuyisqrfennec9e=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A mushroom log — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072488%252f28b8d046 7831 44d9 982c 9ba5ab68b12a.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=wjyob1a3nnknerr2yxf7noxcv3c=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A glorious garden hose — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072486%252f865f5720 913e 4b11 8bee c1fe8b127a3f.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=hygb4 6hop8tj0t1arzt93amcf0=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A fancy watering can — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072810%252f92345560 6b9a 4fa1 a9f8 aad1425c6a02.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=hm2gtawow1fq eengmggkw6di5o=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A grow light — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072818%252fe753cad5 4d35 4511 b873 3d3ce3162e21.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=lhsrneonkrcpiwusgqwwvrdmzsy=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A plant mister — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072816%252f8e684a71 7245 4dca 957b ede1a487f4df.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=idbzbl2oshkwjflpxjfjxw9arxa=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A Nike Air Max planter — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072820%252f4803425c 73c6 4404 aa4d d1370e59e45b.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=6r6d5anqb1n1tsvib4nkj7unskm=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A pair of herb scissors — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072825%252fc354a935 fe59 47ba b0cc 9071ca3e7500.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=dgvxvxsg qbz9wkcjayiutkvzfe=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A plant monitor system — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072829%252f762ea2d6 ee10 45f2 a3d2 a11e21a1ad95.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=73hejvpid0csb8iqf4etezxc cs=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



Plant nutrients — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072832%252f9a13a7e4 d92a 46aa b801 ede7f85100a3.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=ogw6lohjz1gwmuuw0ru shfyuv8=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



A self-watering tool — See Details

Uploads%252fcard%252fimage%252f1072834%252f5faf73fd ffc9 496c 8a1e cd028f0bcc6c.png%252ffit in  675x0.png?signature=bdp7te0qyx1z5sp hkadoy1 jyw=&source=https%3a%2f%2fblueprint api production.s3.amazonaws



Just some dirt — See Details

Read more:


Child-Led Learning Inspired by Julie Bogart’s The Brave Learner

The Parenting Junkie shows us how to do child led learning. In her book, The Brave Learner, Julie Bogart explains that you can learn everything through anything. Even if you are not homeschooling you can still inspire your child with child-led learning at home. Unschooling families can still apply this to help follow their child’s interest without using a formal curriculum. Whether you choose to unschool, homeschool, or send your child to a traditional school this video will inspire you to follow your child’s lead wherever possible when inspiring their learning.

↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

💬 Let’s keep the conversation going! Leave your comments & questions on the blog! (



↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

► Want to See More of This Harry Potter Curriculum? (
► Hear my Interview with the Amazing Julie Bogart (
► Dr. Shefali Tsabary on Education (
► Considering Free Range Parenting? Watch This (

↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓





↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

Tweet with One Click→

Say HI! on Social Media:
★ Instagram:
★ Facebook:
★ Twitter:

#parentingjunkie #childledlearning #childledlearningthroughplay

Read more:


Is misused neuroscience defining early years and child protection policy?

The idea that a child’s brain is irrevocably shaped in the first three years increasingly drives government policy on adoption and early childhood intervention. But does the science stand up to scrutiny?

“Neuroscience can now explain why early conditions are so crucial,” wrote Graham Allen and Iain Duncan Smith in their 2010 collaboration, Early Intervention: Good Parents, Great Kids, Better Citizens. “The more positive stimuli a baby is given, the more brain cells and synapses it will be able to develop.” 

Neuroscience is huge in early years policy. This week, in what’s been characterised as the largest shake-up of family law in a generation, the 26-week time limit for adoption proceedings has come into force, much of it justified by the now-or-never urgency of this set of beliefs, that the first three years (or sometimes first 18 months) hardwire a baby’s brain, either give it or deny it the capacity for a full life. This is the engine of what is known as the First Three Years movement, which has transfixed politicians from across the spectrum. Allen and Duncan Smith’s report opened with an illustration of the “normal child’s” large brain and the shrivelled, walnut brain of the neglected child. With conferences such as Two Is Too Late (organised by Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom) and papers such as The 1,001 Critical Days, a set of claims are made that echo and reinforce those bold claims made by Allen: first, that we now have a set of scientific findings about the infant brain that can teach us new things about parenting. Second, that concrete events occur – from the production of synapses to the lighting up of areas of the brain on an MRI scanner – that can be interpreted in a straightforward way upon which all science is agreed. Third, with terms such as “critical periods” and “hardwiring”, the thesis is put forward that brains have a finite time window for learning certain things. Fourth, that we can distil the treatment of infants into a set of behaviours that will determine the networks in their brains, either equipping them to empathise, learn, engage and produce, or irreparably failing to equip them. The connections made are endless: babies who fail to make the right neural connections will do badly at school, lack empathy, succumb to criminality, have mental health problems, and end up in a cycle of deprivation themselves.  

Continue reading…

Read more:


Forward prize winner Fiona Benson: ‘It’s still taboo to talk about rape and women’s bodies’

The poet, who wrote her winning collection in almost a single sitting, talks about motherhood, sexual violence and using poetry to process trauma

Fiona Benson’s second volume of poems, Vertigo & Ghost, which this week won the Forward prize for best collection, is so full of small, blindingly bright explosions that sometimes you almost drop the book. On the morning after winning the £10,000 prize, the author is suffering from a headache – brought on by adrenaline rather than alcohol – and is full of praise for her fellow shortlisted writers (there are Forward prizes for first collection and best poem, as well for best collection). These include Jay Bernard, Ilya Kaminsky, Raymond Antrobus and Holly Pester, “who read an amazing poem at the award ceremony, about an abortion – it was ragged and raw and beautiful”, she says. “Poetry is so rich and healthy and diverse at the moment.”

In person Benson is quietly spoken, often ending an answer to a question with an apology – “sorry for the feminist rant” – or by checking to make sure she’s been clear. She describes herself as a “private person” living in Devon with her husband and two daughters, but her poems, written “as if nobody is listening”, are exposing. They peel away at the layers of the female body and examine, tenderly yet unflinchingly, its murky chambers. There’s a poem about the “ridged outer labyrinth”, the “intimate, violet latch” of the narrator’s placenta; another called “Ruins”, which describes the worn landscape of a post-partum body, its “inflamed trenches / and lost dominions”.

Continue reading…

Read more:


E-A-T and the Quality Raters’ Guidelines – Whiteboard Friday

Posted by MarieHaynes

EAT — also known as Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness — is a big deal when it comes to Google’s algorithms. But what exactly does this acronym entail, and why does it matter to your everyday work? In this bite-sized version of her full MozCon 2019 presentation, Marie Haynes describes exactly what E-A-T means and how it could have a make-or-break effect on your site.

Click on the whiteboard image above to open a high-resolution version in a new tab!

Video Transcription

Hey, Moz fans. My name is Marie Haynes, from Marie Haynes Consulting, and I’m going to talk to you today about EAT and the Quality Raters’ Guidelines. By now, you’ve probably heard of EAT. It’s a bit of a buzzword in SEO. I’m going to share with you why EAT is a big part of Google’s algorithms, how we can take advantage of this news, and also why it’s really, really important to all of us.

The Quality Raters’ Guidelines

Let’s talk about the Quality Raters’ Guidelines. These guidelines are a document that Google has provided to this whole army of quality raters. There are apparently 16,000 quality raters, and what they do is they use this document, the Quality Raters’ Guidelines, to determine whether websites are high quality or not.

Now the quality raters do not have the power to put a penalty on your website. They actually have no direct bearing on rankings. But instead, what happens is they feed information back to Google’s engineers, and Google’s engineers can take that information and determine whether their algorithms are doing what they want them to do. Ben Gomes, the Vice President of Search at Google, he had a quote recently in an interview with CNBC, and he said that the quality raters, the information that’s in there is fundamentally what Google wants the algorithm to do.

“They fundamentally show us what the algorithm should do.”- Ben Gomes, VP Search, Google

So we believe that if something is in the Quality Raters’ Guidelines, either Google is already measuring this algorithmically, or they want to be measuring it, and so we should be paying close attention to everything that is in there. 

How Google fights disinformation

There was a guide that was produced by Google earlier, in February of 2019, and it was a whole guide on how they fight disinformation, how they fight fake news, how they make it so that high-quality results are appearing in the search results.

There were a couple of things in here that were really interesting. 

1. Information from the quality raters allows them to build algorithms

The guide talked about the fact that they take the information from the quality raters and that allows them to build algorithms. So we know that it’s really important that the things that the quality raters are assessing are things that we probably should be paying attention to as well. 

2. Ranking systems are designed to ID sites with high expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness

The thing that was the most important to me or the most interesting, at least, is this line that said our ranking systems are designed to identify sites with a high indicia of EAT, of expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness.

So whether or not we want to argue whether EAT is a ranking factor, I think that’s semantics. What the word “ranking factor” means, what we really need to know is that EAT is really important in Google’s algorithms. We believe that if you’re trying to rank for any term that really matters to people, “your money or your life” really means if it’s a page that is helping people make a decision in their lives or helping people part with money, then you need to pay attention to EAT, because Google doesn’t want to rank websites that are for important queries if they’re lacking EAT.

The three parts of E-A-T

So it’s important to know that EAT has three parts, and a lot of people get hung up on just expertise. I see a lot of people come to me and say, “But I’m a doctor, and I don’t rank well.” Well, there are more parts to EAT than just expertise, and so we’re going to talk about that. 

1. Expertise

But expertise is very important. In the Quality Raters’ Guidelines, which each of you, if you have not read it yet, you really, really should read this document.

It’s a little bit long, but it’s full of so much good information. The raters are given examples of websites, and they’re told, “This is a high-quality website. This is a low-quality website because of this.” One of the things that they say for one of the posts is this particular page is to be considered low quality because the expertise of the author is not clearly communicated.

Add author bios

So the first clue we can gather from this is that for all of our authors we should have an author bio. Perhaps if you are a nationally recognized brand, then you may not need author bios. But for the rest of us, we really should be putting an author bio that says here’s who wrote this post, and here’s why they’re qualified to do so.

Another example in the Quality Raters’ Guidelines talks about was a post about the flu. What the quality raters were told is that there’s no evidence that this author has medical expertise. So this tells us, and there are other examples where there’s no evidence of financial expertise, and legal expertise is another one. Think about it.

If you were diagnosed with a medical condition, would you want to be reading an article that’s written by a content writer who’s done good research? It might be very well written. Or would you rather see an article that is written by somebody who has been practicing in this area for decades and has seen every type of side effect that you can have from medications and things like that?

Hire experts to fact-check your content

Obviously, the doctor is who you want to read. Now I don’t expect us all to go and hire doctors to write all of our content, because there are very few doctors that have time to do that and also the other experts in any other YMYL profession. But what you can do is hire these people to fact check your posts. We’ve had some clients that have seen really nice results from having content writers write the posts in a very well researched and referenced way, and then they’ve hired physicians to say this post was medically fact checked by Dr. So-and-so. So this is really, really important for any type of site that wants to rank for a YMYL query. 

One of the things that we started noticing, in February of 2017, we had a number of sites that came to us with traffic drops. That’s mostly what we do. We deal with sites that were hit by Google algorithm updates. What we were noticing is a weird thing was happening.

Prior to that, sites that were hit, they tended to have all sorts of technical issues, and we could say, “Yes, there’s a really strong reason why this site is not ranking well.” These sites were all ones that were technically, for the most part, sound. But what we noticed is that, in every instance, the posts that were now stealing the rankings they used to have were ones that were written by people with real-life expertise.

This is not something that you want to ignore. 

2. Authoritativeness

We’ll move on to authoritativeness. Authoritativeness is really very, very important, and in my opinion this is the most important part of EAT. Authoritativeness, there’s another reference in the Quality Raters’ Guidelines about a good post, and it says, “The author of this blog post has been known as an expert on parenting issues.”

So it’s one thing to actually be an expert. It’s another thing to be recognized online as an expert, and this should be what we’re all working on is to have other people online recognize us or our clients as experts in their subject matter. That sounds a lot like link building, right? We want to get links from authoritative sites.

The guide to this information actually tells us that PageRank and EAT are closely connected. So this is very, very important. I personally believe — I can’t prove this just yet — but I believe that Google does not want to pass PageRank through sites that do not have EAT, at least for YMYL queries. This could explain why Google feels really comfortable that they can ignore spam links from negative SEO attacks, because those links would come from sites that don’t have EAT.

Get recommendations from experts

So how do we do this? It’s all about getting recommendations from experts. The Quality Raters’ Guidelines say in several places the raters are instructed to determine what do other experts say about this website, about this author, about this brand. It’s very, very important that we can get recommendations from experts. I want to challenge you right now to look at the last few links that you have gotten for your website and look at them and say, “Are these truly recommendations from other people in the industry that I’m working in? Or are they ones that we made?”

In the past, pretty much every link that we could make would have the potential to help boost our rankings. Now, the links that Google wants to count are ones that truly are people recommending your content, your business, your author. So I did a Whiteboard Friday a couple of years ago that talked about the types of links that Google might want to value, and that’s probably a good reference to find how can we find these recommendations from experts.

How can we do link building in a way that boosts our authoritativeness in the eyes of Google? 

3. Trustworthiness

The last part, which a lot of people ignore, is trustworthiness. People would say, “Well, how could Google ever measure whether a website is trustworthy?” I think it’s definitely possible. Google has a patent. Now we know if there’s a patent, that they’re not necessarily doing this.

Reputation via reviews, blog posts, & other online content

But they do have a patent that talks about how they can gather information about a brand, about an individual, about a website from looking at a corpus of reviews, blog posts, and other things that are online. What this patent talks about is looking at the sentiment of these blog posts. Now some people would argue that maybe sentiment is not a part of Google’s algorithms.

I do think it’s a part of how they determine trustworthiness. So what we’re looking for here is if a business really has a bad reputation, if you have a reputation where people online are saying, “Look, I got scammed by this company.” Or, “I couldn’t get a refund.” Or, “I was treated really poorly in terms of customer service.” If there is a general sentiment about this online, that can affect your ability to rank well, and that’s very important. So all of these things are important in terms of trustworthiness.

Credible, clear contact info on website

You really should have very credible and clear contact information on your website. That’s outlined in the Quality Raters’ Guidelines. 

Indexable, easy-to-find info on refund policies

You should have information on your refund policy, assuming that you sell products, and it should be easy for people to find. All of this information I believe should be visible in Google’s index.

We shouldn’t be no indexing these posts. Don’t worry about the fact that they might be kind of thin or irrelevant or perhaps even duplicate content. Google wants to see this, and so we want that to be in their algorithms. 

Scientific references & scientific consensus

Other things too, if you have a medical site or any type of site that can be supported with scientific references, it’s very important that you do that.

One of the things that we’ve been seeing with recent updates is a lot of medical sites are dropping when they’re not really in line with scientific consensus. This is a big one. If you run a site that has to do with natural medicine, this is probably a rough time for you, because Google has been demoting sites that talk about a lot of natural medicine treatments, and the reason for this, I think, is because a lot of these are not in line with the general scientific consensus.

Now, I know a lot of people would say, “Well, who is Google to determine whether essential oils are helpful or not, because I believe a lot of these natural treatments really do help people?” The problem though is that there are a lot of websites that are scamming people. So Google may even err on the side of caution in saying, “Look, we think this website could potentially impact the safety of users.”

You may have trouble ranking well. So if you have posts on natural medicine, on any type of thing that’s outside of the generally accepted scientific consensus, then one thing you can do is try to show both sides of the story, try to talk about how actually traditional physicians would treat this condition.

That can be tricky. 

Ad experience

The other thing that can speak to trust is your ad experience. I think this is something that’s not actually in the algorithms just yet. I think it’s going to come. Perhaps it is. But the Quality Raters’ Guidelines talk a lot about if you have ads that are distracting, that are disruptive, that block the readers from seeing content, then that can be a sign of low trustworthiness.

“If any of Expertise, Authoritativeness, or Trustworthiness is lacking, use the ‘low’ rating.”

I want to leave you with this last quote, again from the Quality Raters’ Guidelines, and this is significant. The raters are instructed that if any one of expertise, authoritativeness, or trustworthiness is lacking, then they are to rate a website as low quality. Again, that’s not going to penalize that website. But it’s going to tell the Google engineers, “Wait a second. We have these low-quality websites that are ranking for these terms.How can we tweak the algorithm so that that doesn’t happen?”

But the important thing here is that if any one of these three things, the E, the A, or the T are lacking, it can impact your ability to rank well. So hopefully this has been helpful. I really hope that this helps you improve the quality of your websites. I would encourage you to leave a comment or a question below. I’m going to be hanging out in the comments section and answering all of your questions.

I have more information on these subjects at and also /trust if you’re interested in these trust issues. So with that, I want to thank you. I really wish you the best of luck with your rankings, and please do leave a question for me below.

Video transcription by

Feeling like you need a better understanding of E-A-T and the Quality Raters’ Guidelines? You can get even more info from Marie’s full MozCon 2019 talk in our newly released video bundle. Go even more in-depth on what drives rankings, plus access 26 additional future-focused SEO topics from our top-notch speakers:

Grab the sessions now!

Invest in a bag of popcorn and get your whole team on board to learn!

Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don’t have time to hunt down but want to read!

Read more:


Is screen time damaging for your kids? No study can tell you that | Oliver Burkeman

Adjusting your behaviour to each new wrinkle in the science is a mug’s game

Is too much screen time bad for your kids? Don’t look to this column for an answer. The truth is, nobody knows. The unceasing pendulum of lifestyle advice is currently swinging through a “debunking” phase, with numerous articles insisting it’s all been a big panic over nothing. But that’s partly because a report published earlier this year, by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, said there wasn’t enough evidence to give firm guidelines to parents. As the paediatricians explained, though, the key problem is that sufficient high-quality research has yet to be conducted – a conclusion that somehow got turned into this headline, on the parenting website Motherly: “How harmful is screen time for kids? Not as bad as we may think”. The article was sponsored by the US mobile company Verizon – though science has yet to inform us if this was a matter of causation or merely correlation.

Of course, there are valid research findings in this area: there’s evidence that excessive childhood TV time is correlated with obesity and poorer mental health, while social media use probably isn’t often a direct cause of teenage depression. And some studies are better designed than others. But neither opponents nor proponents of screen time have much incentive to mention a more unsettling fact – that it’s almost certainly impossible to know whether too much screen time would clearly damage your kids. The reasons aren’t surprising: human lives are extraordinarily complex things, and no study that aims to say anything meaningful about the population at large can do justice to the innumerable variables at work in your particular family.

Continue reading…

Read more:

Malcare WordPress Security