Eye of Sauron: the real culprit behind the suffering of generations Z and Alpha

Within the universe of The Lord of the Rings, the 'Eye of Sauron' symbolizes Sauron's constant vigilance, absolute power, and oppression over all of Middle-earth. It is described as an all-seeing, flaming eye, representing the villain's menacing presence and desire for total control. All researchers and professionals working with and on the internet agree that much has changed since it became ubiquitous among adults, children, and adolescents. But they diverge into two camps: are smartphones and social media the Eye of Sauron simply because they exist, and do we need to regulate their use? Or, does any technology have an impact on our culture, and can this impact cause behavior to be fundamentally dysfunctional? In this article, I attempt to share both arguments and give voice to a less popular thesis: technology is agnostic; what we do—or don't do—with it is what matters. 

Recently, especially after the publication of Jonathan Haidt's book "The Anxious Generation," alarmism has spread among parents and educators, who have identified a culprit for the ills afflicting Generations Z (1997 to 2009) and Alpha (2010 to 2024): smartphones. Haidt believes the mere presence of smartphones in a given location, coupled with the indiscriminate use of social media, is responsible for the rise in psychiatric illnesses. To support his conclusions, he cites data from the American College Health Association: since 2008, the number of adolescents diagnosed with a mental illness has increased from 201 to 451.

As a researcher and professor of the digital world, I view these numbers with suspicion because children throughout history have grown up under greater threats than the presence of a smartphone. And we don't even need to travel back in time to find these children: after the October 7, 2023, attacks in Israel, among children and adolescents who had direct contact with the Internet, the prevalence of mental disorders increased from 171 to 301. 

I'm concerned that, in Brazil and around the world, we're creating laws to ban smartphone access based on a moral panic that apparently doesn't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny. In any case, the digital world has had an impact on our lives; that's undeniable, but allow me to propose an alternative hypothesis: that it's our culture, aided by smartphones, that's changing adolescent behavior. 

Smartphones, which, surprisingly, have been around since 1994, only became popular in 2007, with the release of the first iPhone. If they've been around for so long, why are teenagers only now feeling their impact? Haidt blames social media and fast mobile internet. I and other researchers, like the Italian Alberto Acerbi, have a different opinion: it's the culture, stupid!

With smartphones, anyone has become a journalist, or, in today's jargon, a "content producer." This means that no matter where we are or what we do, there will always be an evil, red eye of Sauron watching us. This would be fine if surveillance were the only problem. The problem is that this all-seeing eye also cancels, humiliates, and shames. 

Imagine a teenager trying to win over his first girlfriend: there's always the risk of rejection. This is normal, but today, anyone who tries to approach another person, online or in real life, risks being humiliated and canceled in the public square of the internet. A simple print screen can make an 18-year-old boy the laughingstock of the four corners of the world. 

The best content ever produced by this cancellation frenzy that the internet has brought to light is Monica Lewinsky's TED Talk. Yes, that one, “I didn’t have sex with that woman”In it, the most hated woman of 1997 talks about not only her own, but also the experiences of many people who were metaphorically lynched in the digital public square. And the solution to this? A new culture, a culture of tolerance and grace on the internet, in which things like the previous screenshot would be ignored by us, a behavior declassé, vulgar. 

What about the mental health crisis? Are teenagers really sicker? According to the World Economic Forum, teenagers are delaying their entry into adulthood.

My hypothesis is that, out of fear of humiliation and cancellation, teenagers aren't getting their driver's licenses, aren't going out in public, and are remaining infantilized for longer. Because the prospect of going out into the world, whether digital or real, presents a real social risk, for which their minds aren't prepared. In fact, no one is. 

What surprises me most about the prohibitive zeal, both from Haidt and from Brazilian and foreign legislators who have singled out smartphones as the source of all evil, is that Haidt has written repeatedly about how a culture that makes public humiliation its hobby cannot be healthy. He calls this scheme, present in the theory of cognitive behavioral therapy, mind reading, and we are left to assume other people's worst intentions. 

To overcome this behavior, this culture we have today—which I have to agree is highly dysfunctional—Haidt himself suggests a more generous stance that assumes good intentions in others' actions and words. This approach helps reduce unnecessary conflict and promotes healthier interactions, especially in polarized environments. By challenging these automatic assumptions, we can transform the eye of Sauron into more empathetic and tolerant eyes, as well as build more rational communication. Online and in real life, without having to prohibit anything. 

(*) Lilian Carvalho has a PhD in Marketing and is coordinator of the Center for Digital Marketing Studies at FGV/EAESP and founder of Método Lumière