Parenting in the Time of Algorithms: Who Is Helping Raise Our Children?
There was a time when parents worried about the friends their children brought home. We wanted to know who they were, what they were getting up to and whether they were likely to lead our otherwise delightful offspring into trouble. Depending on the generation, we also worried about television, video games, questionable music and whatever new cultural development was apparently going to bring civilisation to its knees.
Today, some of the most persistent influences in a child's life may never come through the front door. They arrive through a screen, selected by digital systems that learn what captures attention and become increasingly efficient at offering more of it. A passing interest in football, fashion, gaming or the solar system can quickly become an extraordinary collection of videos, opinions, advertisements and personalities, all competing for another few moments of attention.
This raises a rather interesting question for modern families. While we have spent years discussing how much time children spend looking at screens, have we paid enough attention to what is looking back at them?
The internet is not the same place for everyone
Many adults still remember an internet where we generally went looking for something. We typed a question, searched for information and followed the results. We were hardly immune to advertising or manipulation, but there was at least a recognisable relationship between what we asked for and what appeared.
Much of today's digital experience operates differently. Recommendation algorithms anticipate what we might enjoy, selecting content according to patterns in our behaviour and, depending on the service, the behaviour of people considered similar to us. Sometimes the results are marvellous. A child fascinated by marine life can discover extraordinary footage of deep-sea creatures. A teenager learning an instrument can find tutorials from talented musicians on the other side of the world.
Yet the same systems can also recommend material that reinforces fears, insecurities or unhealthy preoccupations. Australia's eSafety Commissioner has identified how recommendation systems can amplify harmful content through repeated exposure, while recognising that their effects depend on how they are designed and used.
There is a subtle developmental issue here. Children are learning not only facts about the world but also what matters, what is normal, what other people think and how they themselves fit into the picture. They learn by observing others, testing ideas and noticing which behaviours receive attention or approval. Digital environments have become another place where this learning occurs, often without a parent or teacher nearby to help interpret what is being presented.
Of course, children have always been influenced by people outside their families. Anyone who has watched a perfectly sensible child adopt a friend's peculiar hairstyle or vocabulary will appreciate this. What is different now is the speed, personalisation and persistence of digital influence.
What the research is telling us
A 2026 study by Australia's eSafety Commissioner, Growing up online: Parenting young children in the digital age, surveyed more than 2,000 parents and carers of children aged three to ten. It found that 97 per cent of these children had been online at some point, according to their parents. Most parents were already taking steps to support online safety, yet subjects such as algorithmic influence were among those less commonly discussed.
That suggests a gap worth addressing. Parents are not necessarily neglecting digital safety; many are working hard at it. But the conversation has become more complicated than simply teaching children not to share personal information or communicate with strangers.
Interestingly, international research also challenges some of our familiar assumptions. UNICEF's report Childhood in a Digital World found no clear evidence that screen time, by itself, directly causes poorer mental health. The report identified much stronger concerns around harmful online experiences, including bullying and sexual abuse, while recognising the educational and social benefits of digital participation.
This does not mean that time online is irrelevant. A child who regularly sacrifices sleep, movement, schoolwork or family interaction for another hour of scrolling may have a genuine problem. It does mean that counting minutes alone tells us surprisingly little about the quality of a child's experience.
Children need guides, not just guards
Perhaps the greatest challenge for parents is learning to have conversations about digital influence without turning every discussion into an interrogation.
Imagine a child becoming enthusiastic about a particular product because several favourite online personalities seem to recommend it. Rather than immediately dismissing the enthusiasm, a parent might become curious about how the child discovered it, why it seems so desirable and whether the person recommending it has something to gain.
There is quite a lot of developmental learning available in that conversation. We are teaching children to recognise persuasion, examine social influence, distinguish popularity from credibility and think about the difference between wanting something and needing it. These are useful skills well beyond the internet, especially when children eventually become adults with credit cards.
The same approach can help when children encounter disturbing, misleading or emotionally charged material. A calm conversation about how something made them feel may reveal much more than a detailed inspection of their browsing history.
This is not an argument against parental boundaries. Younger children need close supervision, age-appropriate restrictions and protection from material they are not ready to manage. As children mature, however, guidance must gradually make room for judgement, independence and privacy. The aim is not simply to produce a child who follows digital rules when an adult is watching, but a young person capable of making thoughtful decisions when nobody is.
And what about the adults?
We should probably acknowledge the family member most likely to object to this conversation: the adult who has just spent twenty minutes scrolling through a feed while telling everyone else to get off their devices.
Children are remarkably observant of parental contradictions. They see when a phone interrupts dinner, when an email receives attention before a conversation and when a parent becomes unusually animated about something they have encountered online. It is difficult to teach deliberate technology use if we are unwilling to examine our own habits.
This is where family rituals become important. Meals without devices, shared activities, conversations at bedtime, outdoor play and periods when everyone is allowed to be wonderfully unproductive are not simply alternatives to screens. They create opportunities for attention, emotional connection and the ordinary negotiations through which children learn about relationships.
Australia's social media age restrictions, introduced in December 2025, mean that age-restricted platforms must take reasonable steps to prevent under-16s from holding accounts. This changes part of the digital landscape, but children still encounter personalised technology through other services, games, video platforms and online activities. The work of developing digital judgement therefore remains important.
Nor should families be expected to manage everything alone. Technology companies, educators and governments have responsibilities to create safer environments, provide meaningful information and support children's digital development.
Making room for the family again
The central issue may not be whether technology belongs in family life. It already does, and much of what it offers is valuable. The more useful question is whether we are making sufficiently deliberate decisions about the influence it has.
This was one of the conversations that led Laurence Catzel and me to write Family Digital Detox: Reclaiming Our Home from the Screens Outside It. Our interest was never in persuading families to abandon technology, but in helping them notice what it contributes, what it sometimes displaces and how they might restore a healthier balance.
We cannot expect to be the only influence in our children's lives, nor should we want to be. Childhood involves discovering a world beyond the family. What we can do is remain interested, available and sufficiently connected to help children make sense of what they discover.
Perhaps the next family conversation about screen time might begin a little differently. Instead of opening with how long a child has been online, we might ask them to show us something interesting they have encountered, explain why it matters to them or tell us about an idea they are beginning to question.
We may learn something about technology. More importantly, we may learn something about our child.
#ParentingInTheDigitalAge #FamilyDigitalDetox #DigitalParenting #RaisingDigitalKids #ConnectedFamilies #DigitalWellbeing #MindfulParenting #ThePoppetCentre
Comments