Some interactions via digital tools are perfectly instructive and constructive. Any technology requires the education and prevention that go with it. But education is a political decision, which, in a democracy, often takes time. Twenty-five years ago, we already had, in Switzerland, support groups for people (adults, integrated, well-educated) who couldn't disconnect from online discussions. The evolution of social media and video games over the past two decades hasn't improved things. But it's not "digitalisation" that's the problem, it's the need for immediacy (impulses to buy, act, react, seek social recognition through likes), self-satisfaction by locking oneself in an information bubble, and the surplus of addictive stimuli. This harms reflection. And the lack of reflection, on oneself and on others, the denial of nuance and complexity, harms cohesion and compromise.

Although digitalisation has positive aspects, it must be regulated and limited. In the voting process, face-to-face exchanges are important for forming an opinion. Time is needed to mature a viewpoint, one can hesitate, discuss, compare different arguments, and be confident in one's choice. With digitalisation, being at home in front of one's computer or smartphone changes the situation. Another point: how can we be consistent regarding electricity consumption (growing demand, "advice" from authorities to limit usage, declining and warming waters) that our society should maintain at a certain level, if going fully digital only increases this consumption? Not to mention data storage centres, which are very energy-hungry and require water cooling. All of this is inconsistent.