[bpizzi]

> Screens are extremely addictive to kids. (Adults too, I suppose, but that's their own responsibility.)

No, wrong. What can be addictive is the content displayed by the screen and the eventual interaction that the kid have with this content.

Put a kid in front of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viOkh9al0xM (`This is the Train Driver's/engineers/operator/conductors view from the Bergen Line and the Famous Flåm Railway in Norway in Northern Europe.`), and start a 30s countdown: the kid will have left the screen before, guaranteed.

[the_af]

Wrong. My 2-year old loves videos of trains, both from this perspective and showing the trains themselves. She can last longer than 30 seconds, and is thrilled by them way longer than me (the videos are pretty, but I find trains boring).

The screen itself is addictive. Content can vary, but as long as it's not just a block color without sound or movement, many kids will find themselves glued to it.

[bpizzi]

> Wrong. My 2-year old loves videos of trains, both from this perspective and showing the trains themselves. She can last longer than 30 seconds, and is thrilled by them way longer than me (the videos are pretty, but I find trains boring).

My two 8/10y old boys won't. Great, there's two data point now, we can plot a trend!

> The screen itself is addictive.

Is a switched off screen addictive too?

If your answer is along 'of course not, I just said that content can vary, use your brain, fill in the gaps geez', then that was exactly my point to the GP: no, screen are not systematically addictive per-se, the addiction lies in the viewer's behavior when consuming a specific content.

[Fire-Dragon-DoL]

How about the content is addictive based on the kid's interest?

You can use screen positively: the kid is able to describe back what is being seen, something reasonable is going on.

[otabdeveloper4]

Seems like a distinction without a difference. ("Cigarettes aren't addictive, it's the chemicals in cigarettes that are addictive.")