In the old days, the "small box" was newspapers. Now, it's smartphones. A decade or two down the line, it'll be something else. The cycle never ends.
I'd completely disagree that newspapers encourage compulsive or addictive behavior, like interconnected pocket computers do. Consumption of writings has gone on for 5,000 years. Newspapers were just like books, rarely kept on you, unless transporting it, or perusing it in transit. Once read, you were done with it, until the evening edition.
Twice a day, you consumed some or most, but rarely all of it. Your amount of connectivity, relation & interaction with it was finite. Not so with smart phones. YOU are the only thing standing between looking at that thing indefinitely or not. It's use & availability has no boundaries. The perfect object of addiction.
The purpose for newspapers was a more currently informed public, which
improved daily social relation, with common ground upon which live discussion was undertaken. The internet is a substitute for social interaction, & while it gives an opportunity for more social circle access, those interactions are surely diminished. Some people use as little language as possible, & more often than not, not vocal. Ironically, the phone was invented to speak to one another, & now... that's maybe the least used function of it.
Plus, there is no objective filter. You get sectioned off, & the media you want to see is the media you
only see. This phenomena has ironically made us a less informed public. Its use & availability has no boundaries... except YOU, & surely you have limitations... weaknesses to be exploited.
Newspapers were not interactive social devices, intermingling your personal relations with the world at large. They were a window to the world. Smart phones are increasingly whole aspects of it, including your own world. If anything, a smart phone is more of a window into YOU than the world. Any number of undesirable effects can come of that
While internet/smart phones do bring people together, which can be incredibly powerful. It does so in the most superficial & unchecked way. Bringing people together is one of the most dangerous things in all of human history. In turn, the only benefits smart phones offer are the availability of questionably edited/presented information, & more convenience... & the social & developmental cost of that convenience, we have not even begun to recognize.
I have a history of addiction, in my family, & my life. I don't get a pocket computer, because I know the comforting glow of addiction when I see it, & it is not invited. For modernity, I keep a desktop, 6' from my tv, & a tablet, mostly used in lieu of a work radio. My flip phone is just an alternative to a landline. I barely even text. It's kept only for emergency aid. In an age of instant & overwhelmingly abundant technological convenience, it is only ourselves upon which we rely to govern its influence, & most folks are utter shit at self-governance.