Perhaps this action would trigger a global following, bringing attention the very prominent and quickly developing issue, and hopefully aim at, whenever possible, creating regulations for the phenomenon that is causing this very serious newly established disease.

Chinese psychologist Tao Ran, the researcher behind this initiative, concluded on the basis of his four-year study that the condition is legitimate and is similar to compulsive gambling or alcoholism. Tao Ran estimated that an average Internet addict spends just over six hours of time unrelated to work or study online, consumed by anything ranging from web surfing, to shopping, gambling, gaming or cyber sex. This figure is almost identical to that, established by the American researchers. In fact, Tao’s American colleague Dr. Kimberly S. Young of University of Pittsburgh at Bradford also defined Internet addiction as an impulse control disorder most similarly characterized with the diagnosis of substance abuse or gambling compulsion as (DSM-IV) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

Despite the fact that, according to the Kaiser foundation study “average American kid between 8 and 18-years-old spends eight-and-a-half hours a day on a computer, listening to an iPod, watching TV, or paying attention to some form of digital technology” fully qualifying for the diagnosis and despite Dr. Young’s research the addiction is still not medically recognized in the United States. Such conduct puts the US behind China and other countries like Australia and Greece, both of which passed legislation to limit or prohibit the use of some of the technologies, among them gambling and gaming, blamed for aggravating the condition.

The latter, online gaming, is especially alarming since it targets adolescents, a population already impulsive and overexposed to the new media: “adolescents are more vulnerable to pathological internet use as they have less ability to control their enthusiasm for something that awakens their interests,” (Depression and Internet Addiction in Adolescents, Jee Hyun Ha, and others, Psychopathology, 2007). In addition, pathological Internet use changes the patterns in the ways the youth learns, communicates with each other and forms social bonds. It is only logical to assume that the surplus of information on the Internet leads to attention deficiency, triggering the Attention Deficiency Disorder, (ADD). Indeed, Dr. Young’s subjects “have reported that their inability to control internet usage has impaired their academic, personal, financial, occupational and physical lives.” It might not be too long before we see how the whole nation is slipping away clutched in the hands of addiction; test scores decrease together with the quantity of absorbed knowledge in schools and colleges; GDP stalls due to increased inefficiency of workforce glued to the screens for reasons other than work; social institutions, as that of a marriage, become obsolete in favor of virtual relationships.

During the time of financial crisis when depression and morbidity in the society are at the all time high, forming a perfect climate for the development of an addiction, how long do we have to wait for the government to take the initiative on the issue? But if we look closely at the history of telecommunications legislation, in particular, Telecommunication Act of 1996 we might think that the government has actually started this pandemic, and what is even worse, it did it on purpose.

Before the absolute and victorious integration of the Internet in the United States, television was responsible for preparing the grounds for the mass coercion that happens today. By virtually giving away broadcasting licenses to the corporations the act initiated a flood of uncontrolled programming and advertising, turning the viewers in the “market for eyeballs”. Media powered by advertising has become more cognitively savvy, using all the strategies available to lure the eyeballs. As a result, just as the media flooded with advertising, now the Internet is flooded with infinite offers, triggering impulses, the same impulses that also trigger the addiction, now a disorder that transcends multiple levels. Those already suffering from addiction to one element of cyber pastime just like those who are depressed or have impaired or insufficiently mature judgment are more likely fall victims to more addictions.

But the Internet is a two edged sword. Society reaps and recognizes numerous positive externalities that the new media brings, thus it would never allow the Internet to be banned. In such a case, it has to be regulated. Yet, since the addictions go hand in hand a complex, encompassing approach is needed to address the issue of regulation.

The opponents of the regulation, in light of the complex nature of addiction, could bring a cause and effect argument blaming adjacent pre-existing disorders, such as depression or obsessive-compulsive disorder that did not originate in the Internet, on the outburst of Internet addiction. However, it is a two way street where one condition exacerbates the other. Given the severity and the scope of the issue, still regulation would be beneficial to many.

Among other obstacles to regulation internationally there would be conflicting legal systems and discrepancies between the networks, while domestically there is the First Amendment protection that has allowed much questionable and even illegal elsewhere content, such as hate speech distribution, [[prohibited in France, to appear online in the US.

Looking at the precedents of gambling regulations in countries like Australia, voluntary adaptation and compliance with the specific codes of conduct could be something that the domestic sites could follow. However, it is not realistic to expect that every site in whole entity of the Internet will be covered with seals of compliance.

What needs to be done first is recognizing the Internet addiction as disorder domestically. This would help generate the funds and establish treatment facilities, as well as include the disorder into the health care plans and finally create an independent regulatory board. Raising awareness on the issue will be of particular importance to the parents of the minors, responsible for actively safeguarding the welfare of their children. The government should take a broader role in sponsoring and publishing the research and the resources on how to fight the addiction both online and off.

-- ValentinaGurney - 23 Dec 2008

<--/commentPlugin-->