Gen Z is spending up to $350 (approximately £263) on 'dumb' phones and digital tools that strip out social media, as young people try to curb compulsive scrolling and claw back time from their screens. For a generation raised on Instagram, TikTok and smartphones, getting away from social media has become something some are now willing to pay for.
Young people are experimenting with minimalist phones, app-blocking tools and other methods to make endless scrolling harder, hoping to reclaim time for friendships and activities away from their screens. The options range from software subscriptions to physical devices that restrict access to selected apps, with some products costing hundreds of pounds.
Yet this trend raises an awkward question: why should people have to pay to regain control over technology they already own? Some are prepared to buy specialised devices, while others are finding cheaper ways to change their habits.
For some, digital detoxing means changing the technology they carry every day. For others, it means finding ways to make their existing phones less tempting without giving up the convenience they provide.
'Dumb' Phones and App Blockers Put a Price on Switching Off
Kendall Schrohe, a 23-year-old founding partner of the Attention Studio, has traded her smartphone for a simpler flip phone. CBS News reported that she obtained her device from Dumb.co, a startup that sells phones with practical tools such as maps and music, but without social media.
Schrohe has argued that young people grew up with platforms whose effects they are only now beginning to understand.
Other companies offer alternatives at different prices. The Light Flip, a minimalist phone from Light Phone, is listed at $350 (approximately £263). The device is available to pre-order, with shipments expected to begin in 2027.
Its appeal lies in limiting access to distracting features rather than asking users to exercise self-control every time a notification arrives.
Others are taking a less expensive approach. Shreya Nallamothu, a 19-year-old computer science student at Duke University, built a DIY version of Brick using near-field communication tags purchased online for about £6. Her project illustrates how people can experiment with restricting phone use without necessarily buying a dedicated product.
Commercial alternatives include Brick, a physical device that blocks selected apps when users tap their phones against it. It costs around £44, while Opal offers a free tier alongside a Pro subscription priced at approximately £75 a year.
Shift offers software that blocks distracting apps and websites while keeping essential tools accessible, with a one-time purchase price of $149 (approximately £113).
Gen Z Interest Grows, But Evidence Remains Limited
The interest in simpler devices is not confined to individual anecdotes. A 2024 Morning Consult survey of 2,202 US adults found that 28 per cent of Gen Z adults were interested in acquiring a basic phone, compared with 17 per cent of adults overall. The findings indicate interest in alternatives, although they do not establish how many people will eventually buy one.
In an August 2026 report, CBS News described young people switching to stripped-down phones to reduce social media use. Schrohe said a 30-day programme that required her to give up her smartphone helped her change her relationship with social media.
The account illustrates one person's experience rather than establishing that such programmes work for everyone.
Everyday Life Still Runs Through Smartphones
The practical challenge is that modern life still relies on smartphones. Banking, travel, messaging and work can all depend on apps, making a complete switch difficult for people who need those services. A more limited device may help reduce distractions, but it can also introduce inconvenience that users have to weigh against the benefits.
Some businesses are responding by encouraging people to use digital tools for a different purpose. Pie, an app that highlights local events and meet-ups, reported that its user base increased from 120,000 in July to 300,000 in August, a rise of 150 per cent.
Its approach centres on using software to organise real-world activities rather than encouraging people to consume an endless feed of content.
The examples point to a commercial opportunity, but also a contradiction. A digital detox product can become another subscription or device competing for consumers' money, even when its stated purpose is to reduce dependence on technology. The free version of Opal remains an option, and deleting unwanted apps costs nothing.
For some, physical restrictions provide the separation they need. Others can start by removing apps, disabling notifications or setting limits on when they use their devices. The challenge is not necessarily to reject technology, but to make it serve daily life rather than dominate it.
