Digital Backlash: “Too Many Products Fail to Deliver on Their Promises”

Children and digital media. Few topics generate as much political debate or raise as many questions among parents. What is my child watching? For how long? And with whom? The Upper Austrian EdTech company Ohana, a member of our network, has developed a technological answer: an AI-powered parental control app that gives parents greater oversight without relying on bans or restrictions. We spoke with founder and CEO Christian Orgler about the digital backlash – a trend currently shaping the technology sector.

What does the digital backlash mean for you and for Ohana?

For Ohana, it is less of a countertrend and more a confirmation of what we have been working towards from the very beginning: helping families use digital media more consciously, safely and healthily. If quality becomes more important than digital products that offer little real value, we welcome that development. Parents, schools and policymakers are finally asking the right questions.

Where do you see legitimate criticism of educational technology, and where does blanket rejection begin to hinder innovation?

The problem starts when digital solutions are dismissed as harmful across the board. The key question should not be whether something is digital or analogue, but whether it genuinely benefits children. Personalised learning solutions can create opportunities that traditional methods alone often cannot provide. That should not be overlooked in the debate. Legitimate criticism arises when products prioritise engagement over well-being, when learning solutions use gamification techniques borrowed from the entertainment industry to maximise screen time, or when nobody has seriously evaluated whether they actually improve learning.

Do you think the backlash is changing what entrepreneurs build? And has it changed your own approach?

Absolutely. I see more and more products trying to support the backlash itself, such as lockboxes for mobile phones or similar solutions. For us, the backlash reinforces the direction we have already taken, but it also forces us to be very clear about our purpose. We are not developing features that allow parents to control their children as much as possible. Instead, we want to help parents make informed decisions and have meaningful conversations with their children.

How can EdTech entrepreneurs contribute to a more balanced discussion without becoming defensive?

By remaining transparent and by not presenting technology as a cure-all. Users quickly recognise when marketing promises exceed the actual value of a product. We should openly discuss where digital solutions are helpful and where their limitations lie. Ultimately, the future will be about combining different approaches.

Are political decisions currently driven more by public opinion than by evidence?

On the one hand, many of the current announcements are based on evidence. Social media is simply not beneficial for children under the age of 14. I closely follow the countries that have already introduced social media bans and also examine where those approaches fall short. Many of these policies are announced with the caveat that the technical implementation still needs to be resolved. In my view, that is unfortunately the point politicians often postpone. We are always open to discussions and already have a number of ideas we would be happy to contribute.

Have EdTech providers themselves contributed to the backlash?

Yes. Too many products have been launched with educational promises that were never seriously evaluated. UX decisions (User Experience) have too often treated increased usage time as a measure of learning success. That is a fundamental misconception, and it is now catching up with the industry. Trust is not built by ignoring problems, but by addressing them openly.

Should EdTech startups adapt to the backlash or push back against it?

Neither. Startups should not chase every trend, but they should take legitimate criticism seriously. Anyone who wants to build successful products today must be able to demonstrate why their digital solution is better than an analogue alternative. I see this as a real opportunity to differentiate. In the end, the better product will prevail—especially in EdTech, where success ultimately means that someone learns something.

Is the current backlash ultimately a healthy corrective for the sector, or a structural threat to educational innovation in Europe?

I see it primarily as a corrective. Every technology goes through phases of high expectations followed by disillusionment. What matters is what emerges afterwards. If the backlash leads us to develop more responsible and more effective products, the entire sector will benefit in the long run. The real danger would be if legitimate criticism turned into a blanket rejection of digital innovation. Europe needs innovation—but innovation with responsibility. That is exactly the principle on which we built Ohana.

Read next: Learn more about the digital backlash in our interview with Jannie Jeppesen from Swedish EdTech Industry and the European EdTech Alliance.