It's David.

I've been filmmaker, and in this clip I want to take a look at something that is being spoken about on my YouTube channel.

On my comments all the time.

Cell phones horrible.

They're horrible for kids.

They've destroyed society.

We don't have dinners anymore.

We can't die alike anymore.

There's no more eye contact.

Stop this.

This is wrecking our Children.

They're addicted to their phone.

You will heard that I have sons.

They're addicted to their phone.

They have friends who are online that they've never met.

Friends.

Is that a friend to my generation?

That a friend you gotta meet, Shake the hand, etcetera.

But to their generation, it's riel and then gaming and violence of violence to kids.

They're so addicted that can't even think anymore.

You've all heard that even if you don't believe it, I don't.

But I wanted to look at another kind of media or technology in history and see if there was something similar that occurred at that time.

So I picked the novel.

You wouldn't think anything is bad about the novel.

In fact, parents that telling Children put down your phone and read a novel.

So the time is 17 40 a novel.

Pamela comes out in a smaller size, a size you can actually carry in your pocket.

A new idea.

Pamela freaked out governments and critics.

It caused a panic.

They said that this was going to end.

Thinking that people would no longer be able to distinguish fact from fiction.

They said that Pamela was particularly dangerous for women, that it caused all kinds of changes in the way that they think and the way that they see.

Listen to this, that it distracted them for more useful activities, that it was filling their heads with unrealistic fantasies and making them more likely to run off with inappropriate suitors.

So this controversy is kind of growing, and it's 17 70 Go Through, writes a novel which ends with a suicide.

People around the world feared copycat deaths.

Several governments banned the book and band the idea of the novel, and in 17 78 it kind of reached a high point, where governments began suggesting a sin s i N tax, which would stop people from reading these horrible novels and also give the government some extra money kind of sounds like the marijuana laws.

And maybe the cell phone was, If we get the have any people were encouraged by governments to read this.

Now this true history's not novels, which were not true.

As for this addiction, I was thinking of my own youth when we had a kid in my class who played the violin and he played the violin for eight hours a day.

But you can walk to school, play the violin, played all weekend.

Parents thought it was wonderful.

School photo was wonderful.

It was perfectly good.

Whereas what we rolled away watching TV was disgusting, horrible.

Gonna wreck us, destroy us.

The violin was good.

This was bad.

Now parents are telling the kids to read a novel.

So how I feel about it is the cell phone is neither good nor bad.

It is, and I think young people are going to be different as a result of it.

I was listening to a Stanford lecture last week in which the guy said, We're going to be having contact lenses that provide additional information to everything that we see.

So I asked my son if you were out walking in the woods and you see a tree versus you're out walking in the woods and you see a tree on.

All this information pops up how old it is.

Who was there before some photographs.

Whatever.

Which would you prefer?

He's 18 he said.

Of course.

The information.

Who wouldn't want the information hard pressed?

Argue about that.

But nature, I said.

He said that nature.

I'd rather see the information and be in this three dimensional space.

Then just be with nature.

I know what I'm going to hear from some of you about this, but I'm suggesting to you that these periodic technologies shake us up and do change things like the novel did, but not necessarily in bad ways in the way we first think.

What do you think?

I welcome your comments.