Sad, bad or mad? Or none of the above?
There’s a global debate raging about the state of our youth. On the one hand, there are the influential voices of two academics, Jonathan Haidt and Jean Twenge, raising the alarm that kids everywhere are cracking under the pressure of a technological revolution they aren’t wired to manage. On the other, a growing list of opposing voices, most recently led by a cover story in The Economist, suggesting that on many measures the kids are doing better than we think.
Who’s right? Only time will tell, but here are some of the key data points being argued over—and who is taking which side. Telling in itself.
Happy or Sad?
The heart of the debate is the sudden increase in mental health issues faced by young people aged between 12 and 27, aka Gen Z. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt is leading the charge, pointing the finger at social media for making our kids, especially girls, sick. His book, The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness, charts the rise in mental health issues among Gen Z starting in 2012. That was the year Apple launched the iPhone. Haidt is leading a campaign to restrict social media access and protect young brains from the pull of unregulated tech giants and their algorithms designed for addiction. He pulls together research and proof of the causation between social media and mental health, and is sharing it all online. In particular he points to four interrelated “foundational harms”—social deprivation, lack of sleep, attention fragmentation and addiction—and is working to “bring childhood back to earth.”
Jean Twenge is a psychology professor who’s built a career on analysing generational traits and trends. Her most recent book is lengthily titled IGen: Why Today’s Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, less Happy and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood. That pretty well sums up her thesis which she scrupulously documents with mountains of data charting “39 million people” through dozens of analyses and graphs. She profiles Gen Z (who she calls iGen) across a series of ‘I’ words: “Internet, No In-Person, Insecure, Irreligious, Insulated, Indefinite, Inclusive, and Independent.” In her substack, she shares the latest statistics on suicide, showing the fast-increasing levels of young American men in their 20s taking their own lives, overtaking middle-aged men. It’s not an encouraging portrait.
Both of these positions come from American writers and thinkers, even though they are casting their research nets globally. One of the challenges for the rest of the world is to disentangle the cultural and generational arguments of causality.
Purposefully striding into the boxing ring on the opposing side is the British-based Economist magazine, with a recent cover story titled Reasons to be Cheerful About Generation Z—They Are Not Doomed to Be Poor and Anxious. In a series of articles, The Economist offers a different perspective on this group of emerging adults now entering the workforce. It contexts the conversation with a global look at the two billion young people born between 1997 and 2012 who are being debated under the single, simplifying label of ‘Gen Z.’ One of the key points they underline is that four-fifths of this cohort live in emerging economies. Unlike the American youthscape dominating much of the debate, they suggest the majority of these “young” are likely to grow up better off than their parents—“richer, healthier and more educated.”
Everyone is getting in on the argument. Gallup (sponsored by the Walton Family Foundation) just published a report on Youth Happiness claiming that 73% of American Gen Zers self-report as being “somewhat” or “very” happy. They also argue that Gen Z adults who are already married and have children are “markedly happier than their peers.” They dig down into the diversity of this huge cohort and note that the one fifth of Gen Zers who identify as LGBT are “16 percentage points less likely to say they are happy than heterosexual Gen Z adults.” It’s perhaps not surprising to note that this research is funded by a family foundation.
Gallup’s data also has happiness declining markedly with age. While the 12- to 14-year-olds feel pretty good, this plummets to a much lower level after 21. And like most other studies (and aligning with Haidt), this one confirms that the more time kids spend on social media, the more anxious they are. If you read to the end, Gallup agrees that nearly half of Gen Zers report feeling anxious and a quarter feel depressed, which clashes somewhat with their headline claim of majority happiness.
Where most researchers align is both that technology is a major differentiator of this generation, and the more time young people spend online, the more ill-health they suffer. A recent McKinsey study, Gen Z and Mental Health, interviewed 42,000 young people across 26 countries and corroborated the link, but added that in eight countries surveyed, Boomers spent as much time on social media as Gen Zers do. McKinsey puts the separation between healthy and unhealthy usage at two hours per day. Over that level, younger people report more problems. (In Asia, a third of Gen Zers spend six or more hours per day on their phones). But McKinsey focuses on the many positive impacts of technology reported across all generations. More than half of every generation say self-expression and social connectivity are the valued upsides of social media.
So…happy or sad? It seems to depend on a degree of moderation, a balance with other factors—and a 2-hour social media limit.
Connected Or Disconnected?
Is Gen Z the most globally connected generation the world has ever seen, able to reach like-minded people across cultures, countries and socioeconomic classes in a way no prior generation has even approached? Or are they a lonely, alienated group who spend most of their time online in their rooms as a way to avoid ‘real’ social interactions?
A group of four inter-disciplinary (anthropology, linguistics, sociology and religious studies) professors (from Oxford and Stanford) look at this question in Gen Z, Explained—The Art of Living in a Digital Age. They describe a generation that has much to teach all of us about how to collaborate and thrive in the digital age. They remind us that Gen Z is the first generation connected to 8 billion people across the planet. They are learning to navigate “the vast expansion of information and options on the internet to find like-minded people with whom to cluster and, through such exploration, discover, refine and create their own identities.” Which includes the extraordinary use and attachment to TikTok, now much beloved of some 170 million American users, and where almost a third of 18-to-30 year-olds get their news.
What seems promising in this new age of connectedness is the pent-up demand from people of all ages to work together. A report from CoGenerate (Is America Ready to Unleash a MultiGenerational Force for Good?) looks at what it would take to de-silo America’s increasingly age-compartmentalized culture—and how welcome this would be to both young and old. Over 96% of survey respondents think that working inter-generationally would “help solve America’s problems.”
But while connectedness may be reaching new heights and global breadth, others point to an “epidemic of loneliness.” They share data showing that Gen Z are the loneliest generation alive. That the constant search for convenience is eliminating the pain and promise of human connections—from the supermarket to the school teacher. In Gen Z, Explained, a kindergarten teacher described her 5-year old charges addressing her the way they do Alexa—with no emotion, respect or even acknowledgement that they are addressing another human.
Freya India is a 24-year-old writer who eloquently describes what Gen Z is like—from the inside. She’s just been recruited to join Haidt’s Anxious Generation team. In her substack, GIRLS, she writes that her generation has been hijacked by algorithms and suffers from something called ‘anemoia.’ That’s nostalgia for a time you’ve never even experienced. She describes how Gen Zers are busy watching old video snippets online, yearning for an unimaginable pre-phone time where teens weren’t glued to their phones and can be seen actually talking and relating to each other. She shares her own dystopian world of loneliness and hunger for seemingly impossible connections. Her writing is compelling.
As is that of NYU business school student Bradley Andrews who describes the impact of “uninterrupted continuity” of 24-hour global connectedness in his substack, Prolix. It gives the individual “constant info to consume without the opportunity to truly understand or integrate it. It simultaneously lacks completion and prevents wholeness. Uninterrupted discontinuity is the psychological equivalent of hitting lightspeed in a hamster wheel.”
Haidt suggests we listen to what the kids are telling us. That not all truth is limited to statistics and numbers. And that connectedness has consequences.
But one thing is perhaps easier to measure—that’s money.
Rich Or Poor?
The Economist argues counter-intuitively (and in the face of much self-reported perception of financial distress) that this generation is “unprecedently rich” - that both Millennials and Boomers were poorer than Gen Z at a similar age and stage. They remind us that of the 250 million people behind the Gen Z label in the rich world, half are now working, and that ‘Zoomers’ already account for 6,000 American CEOs. “The pushing and shoving over Gen Z’s anxiety,” writes the magazine, “has obscured another way in which the cohort is distinct. In financial terms, Gen Z is doing extraordinarily well.”
Because of demographic shifts and fewer young people relative to older generations, they are heading into tight labour markets where they have more bargaining power—and an increased interest in labour organising. The Economist points to outsized Gen Z wage growth in a number of countries, and the highest ‘young person premium’ since reliable data started. Even given educational debt and sky-high housing prices, they say that Americans under 25 spent 43% of post-tax income on housing and education (including interest)—slightly below the average for the same age group between 1989 and 2019.
Gen Z, they add, see working as a right, rather than the privilege that Millennials graduating during the financial crisis did. So they are more demanding, less loyal - and also far less entrepreneurial. They are also less convinced of the need for (and the cost of) graduate degrees and are increasingly leaning towards vocational training—and in-demand skills.
Yet most Gen Zers don’t feel rich. The overwhelming narrative has been that they are caught between the impossible pressures of cost of living crises, unattainable housing prices and shackled by educational debt. But other reporting finds them shunning college and the associated debt for other qualifications that are more pragmatically linked to old fashioned income-generation.
Ed Huang, Co-Founder and Executive Director at Resume Genius, points to the 158% jump in US college tuition fees to explain Gen Z’s new choices. “It’s clear that younger generations like Gen Z are gravitating toward vocational training not just for its affordability but because it aligns closely with their realistic assessments of what today's economy looks like. This generation—what some are calling the ‘toolbelt generation’—is acutely aware of the uncertainties that lie ahead, including job security and the ability to afford a home, concerns that weren’t as pronounced for previous generations at the same age.”
Tech Enabled Or Addled?
The heart of the debate over this digital-age generation is whether technology—and the social media it has spawned—is making or breaking them. Gen Z now accounts for 30% of the global population and represent 27% of the workforce in 2025. Almost all of them (98%) have a smartphone. And their state of mind is leaving home and schools and starting to impact the workplace—and the economy.
Most people refer to this generation as “digital natives,” scoffs futurist Peter Hinssen, author of The New Normal. But it’s much deeper than that, he suggests. Technology is embedded in the way they live their lives and construct their very identities. They don’t see it as ‘digital’ at all. They navigate the online world more holistically and seamlessly than their elders - but also more knowledgeably. They work, shop, learn and love online. Having grown up with the stuff, they may also know better than older folk how to limit its excesses in their own lives. They are starting to curate their online existences more intentionally and may turn to trends of downsizing their public online presences.
George Ploubidis, Professor of Population Health and Statistics at University College London’s Social Research Institute, doesn’t think social media is the underlying cause—or maybe just a part of many inter-related factors. His theories zoom out to include a life-course perspective, noting that Gen Z had very different childhoods than their predecessors. He points to a combination of entirely other factors: helicopter parenting, security concerns, the lack of face-to-face interactive play with other children, and the growing inequalities that exist not only between generations but also within them.
How much of the rising mental health crisis is caused by tech, and how much of it is fuelled by what is going on in the world as these kids emerge into adolescence and adulthood: geopolitical unrest, wars and disruptions, political polarization, financial worries, educational interruptions during the pandemic and the constantly darkening cloud of climate change?
Deep in the McKinsey report cited earlier is this short passage: “Many Gen Z respondents reported experiencing stress, sadness, anger, and frustration due to climate change and its related disasters. More than 50 percent of total respondents expressed fear and anxiety about the future, with Gen Z demonstrating greater concern than other generations. More than 50 percent of all respondents agree or strongly agree that “government leaders and companies have failed to take care of the planet.”
Roberta Katz, one of the co-authors of Gen Z, Explained, says that “as much as postmillenials have to learn, they also have much to teach. They are trying to humanise an intractable, inhuman world that seems to be headed for disaster.”
How do we measure the impact of the social, economic and political climate they are growing up in compared to the technology they are using to learn about it, discuss it and start to reshape it?
Bradley Schurman of Human Change suggests that Gen Z most resembles the Greatest Generation, born almost exactly a century before Gen Z (1901 to 1927). They experienced parallel pressures. He outlines them his NewRulesMedia substack:
- INEQUALITY: a period of extreme income inequality during the high-flying 1920s, followed by the crash and the Great Depression.
- PANDEMICS: The Spanish Flu epidemic of 1918-20 that killed many more millions than covid.
- AUTHORITARIANISM: The rise of Nazism and Stalinism, the attack on Pearl Harbor and two World Wars.
- NEW MEDIA: The emergence of new media like radio and film that were quickly used and manipulated by authoritarian powers for propaganda.
The Greatest Generation, forged in fire, became a force for extraordinary change and statesmanship globally, following World War II. Will Gen Z, now flexing its activist muscles on campuses across the U.S. and in emerging countries around the globe do the same? What will their impact be on the mass of 2024 elections they will increasingly decide (including whether or not they vote)? For sure, their ability to harness social media and create communities of influence will reshape the pace and content of politics and policy for decades to come.
Confusion Reigns—And Distracts
The scientists, psychologists, sociologists and economists are not yet aligned on the causes—or consequences—of what’s ailing our global young. But there is growing agreement that the kids aren’t OK. UCL’s Ploubidis refers to the phenomenon, in a phone interview, as ‘generational drift.’ That each generation is slightly worse off in a variety of ways than the one preceding it.
These issues don’t usually get the attention they deserve, he notes, until it impacts the economy. That’s what’s happening now. As Gen Z enters the workforce, companies, consultants and governments are waking up to Gen Z’s unprecedented levels of mental health challenges. If we don’t find, address and accompany the issue , the long-term impacts will not be pretty. But focusing the conversation on a single cause like social media, he says, may not be doing them—or us—a service. It may lead to insufficient or ineffective solutions like banning smartphones until certain ages.
Candice L. Odgers, associate dean for research and a professor of psychological science and informatics at the University of California, Irvine, agrees. She recently published a review of Haidt’s book in Nature warning against over-blaming tech and social media for the state of the world’s young. She says that this allows us to take our eye off the ball of other potential causes—and solutions—too quickly. “We have a generation in crisis,” she writes, “and in desperate need of the best of what science and evidence-based solutions can offer. Unfortunately, our time is being spent telling stories that are unsupported by research and that do little to support young people who need, and deserve, more.”
Including what we call the people most affected, and lumping all the issues under the ‘Gen Z’ label. Pew Research has announced it’s giving up on generational labels altogether. Pew says they have been over-hyped, over-sold and under-researched. They note that “generational research has become a crowded arena. The field has been flooded with content that’s often sold as research but is more like clickbait or marketing mythology.” So they won’t be calling them Gen Z anymore.
But whatever we call them (or don’t), our kids may need better help than we even know how to define. It’s complex, contradictory and will dominate media columns for some time to come. No matter your age, the health of our global young will mark your future. It’s time the grown-ups do their homework.
