How should we talk about the digital well-being of young people in the field of youth work?

Does this sound familiar? You were only going to check the time on your phone. Suddenly, it’s 15 minutes later, and the screen is still shining brightly – and within that time you have read the latest arrived emails, replied to few messages, viewed a couple of videos that your friend sent you via Instagram, googled the address of a local lunch restaurant and added tomorrow’s Teams-meeting to your Google calendar.

Smartphones and other digital devices have become an integral part of everyday life – whether in social life, leisure, studies or work, participating in civic debate, or simply finding information and using public services. In many ways, we are living on a digital ‘plateau of productivity’ (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (¹), where digitalisation leaks through the layers of society in increasingly mundane ways.

Young people today live out their youth on this plateau barefoot. How do we address this issue, and which issues should online debates concerning young people center on? Are we too hastily dressing digitalisation in cape of the hero or too readily painting it as a boogeyman?

Author

Essi Holopainen (M.Soc.Sc., Doctoral student) has been working as a researcher in Finnish Youth Research Society since 2022. Together with Anu Gretschel she has been responsible for updating YouthWiki database (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) by European Comission, and participated in various research projects related to the wellbeing of young people. Currently Holopainen is doing her doctoral thesis on the themes of mental health and peer relationships of young people in online contexts.

Contact me for more information: essi.holopainen@helsinki.fi.

Youth behind the screens

The youth of the current generations, the so-called “digital natives”, will encounter more digital platforms, applications and other technological solutions in their daily lives than previous generations. Screen time for them is not just about leisure and idleness but it also increasingly intertwines with the formal structures of everyday life.

The benefits of digital development are well recognised. Recently there has also been more attention paid to the drawbacks of the increased reliance on digital devices. The National Youth Work and Youth Policy Programme (VANUPO) for the years 2024-2027 (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (²) highlights the effects digital devices have on young people’s concentration, the worsening mental health of today’s youth, reduced physical activity, recurring online violence and the increasing spread of disinformation on various digital platforms.

However, the debate around the use of digital tools is still quite black-and-white, characterised by an either-or mentality. On the one hand, youngsters are chastised for spending too much time on their devices, or on the wrong platforms. On the other hand, sectors involved with digital development and innovation see new digital tools as the solution to almost everything, while young people’s own online activity is often seen as problematic. Youth researchers Jenni Kallio and Susanna Ågren pointed out recently in their text (21.11.2024) in Helsingin Sanomat, that the current debate on social media “is adult-centered and has the characteristics of a moral panic” (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (³).

The multidimensional nature of young people’s digitalised leisure time is understood well in the field of youth work. The concept of digital youth work has also expanded from a separate work method towards a more holistic approach to supporting young people’s growth and development in a digitalised world. This approach is sorely needed.

As the digitalisation of everyday life is a reality, how does youth-oriented work navigate between fears and hype? And what kind of debate should be held and maintained in the field of youth work on the digital well-being of young people?

For this blog, I, together with my research colleague Anu Gretschel interviewed Specialist Heikki Lauha from The Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra. Lauha has worked for a long time on the themes of digitalisation and the democratic participation of young people. The main highlights of our discussion are compiled below.

The direction of digital development from a youth work perspective

1) Today’s large corporate-owned social media and its’ underlying data economy suffers from a lack of transparency

Most young people use commercial social media services such as YouTube, TikTok, Instagram or Snapchat (^{4, 5}) – many of them use more than one of the above and daily. Various social media platforms utilise addictive and engaging algorithms based on data collected from users. From the perspective of strengthening democratic inclusion, the operating logic of existing social media platforms should not be ignored. Instead, young people should be encouraged to get involved in the debate on data collection and use. The discursive focus should shift from rejecting traditional social media platforms to a more content-oriented and functional education in media and technology, and discussions regarding the importance of privacy and democracy should include young people.

Finding ways to involve young people in the development of sustainable digital solutions and in decision-making regarding the use of technology will be increasingly important in the future. In Scotland (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (⁶), for example, children and young people have been actively involved in the implementation of the National AI Strategy.

2) Threat-oriented discussions about social media often dismiss relevant intercultural phenomena relevant to young people

Despite the actual risks, traditional social media platforms offer precious opportunities for youth to maintain their agency and autonomy, build cohesion and solidarity, and support their participation and empowerment, which the field of youth work has strived to defend. We must remain curious and open-minded when young people themselves describe the benefits of social media use in terms of civic engagement and participation, finding like-minded people and supportive networks or creating different kinds of content. Traditional social media has been highly essential especially for young people from various minority groups, who have been able to find supporting peer-comunities online.

3) By focusing on the ‘information well-being’ it is possible to tackle the growing digital burden

Increased online communication on various digital platforms also increases the amount of time already spent on devices, for which young people are often blamed as individuals. This should be recognised also in the digital development work. According to the survey by the Mannerheim League for Child Welfare (2024) (5), many young people themselves would like to reduce their screen time and quit using some social media platforms. The Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra and the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare are currently working in a cooperation project (⁷) to study the relationship between information and well-being, especially from the perspective of well-being and social inclusion. The digital burden and its underlying factors should be addressed better in public conversations, together with young people, as in the field of youth work.

4) The debate on AI should take place in different sectors

The Ministry of Education and Culture and the Finnish National Agency for Education will publish guidelines for the use of AI in childhood education and care, primary and lower secondary education, general upper secondary education, vocational education and training and liberal adult education (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (⁸). The aim of these guidelines is to “support early childhood education and training providers in using AI as part of teaching and learning”. The field of youth work also needs to discuss how best to utilise AI and the policies related to its use in everyday life. A youth work approach would support policies in education and training by taking into account the leisure contexts and cultural phenomena relevant to young people. Who would facilitate the debate on AI in the field of youth work, and how it should be funded?

Who would coordinate the debate around digital approaches?

Navigating the jungle of digital information today requires more media literacy skills than ever before. Both young people and the adults who work with them are wrestling with digital over-consumption and adapting to use a growing number of new digital tools and applications while trying to control their own screen-time.

The need for digital youth work and the coordination thereof is more acute than before. This is why the funding cuts in the field of youth work are worrying, as for example the Center for Digital Youth Work Verke was left without a state subsidy (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (⁹). As a result of the same cuts in national funding, a former Youth Work Centre of Excellence Koordinaatti has ended its’ operating period (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (¹⁰) and the network for online youth work NUSUVEFO (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (¹¹), which has operated for almost 20 years, is therefore currently without a permanent coordinator.

In the youth work sector, the growing digital burden and the consequences of digitalisation are therefore more often dealt with at organisational, employee-based and individual levels.

In the interview, Lauha argued that the youth sector needs new openings for discussion on the development of digital youth work, the current needs of the sector and its prospects. According to him, the field of youth work offers relevant understanding of the various phenomena affecting young people’s lives and the knowhow to tackle the relevant issues.For the discussions on rapidly developing AI the sector needs more meeting places for sharing good practices and having inclusive and multi-voiced debates about future guidelines. Involving young people in the debate on how to operate in digital environments is crucial, as digital development is also driven by many commercial interests that are not concerned with young people’s well-being (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (¹²).

Despite the cuts in national funding, digital youth work is an everyday practice and approach in the field. Its strength lies in creating everyday opportunities and spaces for young people to develop their own critical, ethical and innovative thinking in relation to technological developments and the digital future (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (¹³). Both young people and youth work professionals are needed to participate in the debate between the digital innovation hype and risk-centered concerns, which often neglect the hopes and needs of young people themselves (see also Moisala & Laine 2021 (Visit an external site. The link opens in a new tab.) (¹⁴).

One strength of the youth work is the understanding of young people’s world as such – an everyday reality where the same phenomenon can be both inclusive and exclusive, empowering and exhausting, both a unifying and a divisive force, and driving both democratic participation and extremism, depending on the perspective.

Should we, together, carve out a space for a debate on digitalisation within the sphere of youth work? Preferably off the screens.