itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/LocalBusiness" itemref="_openingHoursSpecification16 _telephone2 _url34 _address3 _openingHoursSpecification19 _openingHoursSpecification23 _openingHoursSpecification8 _openingHoursSpecification27 _openingHoursSpecification12 _openingHoursSpecification31"

Over the weekend the New York Times had several pieces about the kerfuffle developing over social media use by — mainly — kids.

One by Emily Cochrane was the least alarmist. Here is the explanatory paragraph about a call by a professor for people to limit their social media use:

“The challenge through January was issued by Cal Newport, an associate professor of computer science at Georgetown University. Mr. Newport, who runs a blog about managing digital productivity, encouraged his thousands of readers to remove every piece of digital interaction that wasn’t critical to their work and lives. At the month’s end, he instructed, slowly add everything back in.”

No report yet on how many were successful.

What’s going on here and in other places around the country is a reassessment of the value of things like Twitter and FaceBook and SnapChat, etc. What value is there in being constantly connected to your friends or strangers in your social circle? Does the value diminish in inverse proportion to the amount of time you spend?

Some of the founders of FaceBook, and other similar networks, are now talking about dangers rather than value.

I know that parents whose opinions I appreciate are ahead of this curve and are taking steps to limit their teenage kids exposure. I’m sure that’s not easy, given the pressure from their kids’ peers.

It’s a fight worth having, though, if the experts are to be believed.