I think in todays world, a mobile phone is a far safer mapping device than a paper map.
The main downside of a phone is is can have no signal or battery. People understand that downside well, and often prepare by bringing battery packs, solar chargers, offline maps apps, many phones in a group, etc.
The main downside of a paper map is you don't have the blue dot. People have less experience with it. Usually only 1 person in a group has purchased the expensive map.
When lost in adverse conditions, I'd give the group of inexperienced teenagers with a phone higher odds of getting home for dinner than those with a paper map.
Also, a phone is actually a phone. Nevis is obviously not at the centre of civilisation, but the UK is small, so there's a fair chance that somebody with a phone can get working service and call for help if they need it. Good luck calling for help with your paper map.
Every teenager who sits down, and phones mum to report that they're tired and cold and lost and instead of an awesome view they were promised it's just fog everywhere, is safer than the one with a map who is falsely confident this patch of snow is the route safely down when it might just actually conceal a cliff.
I don't think anyone here is arguing that people should discard modern technology because it isn't authentic or something like that. I and others are arguing that you shouldn't be wholly dependent on an electronic map or someone coming to help you because you're tired and cold. (And, by the way, if conditions are hazardous, search and rescue may well elect to wait un til the next day if they'd be putting themselves in danger.)
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say or compare or even why. "Mobile phone" online maps often have completely blank areas in wild areas whilst a specific "paper" map for that area is rich in detail. If you're going hiking, you'd take both a paper map for the area because it's more likely to be accurate AND you'd take a phone because GPS and being able to call for help is useful.
And even calling for help can be marginal. Not that it's a panacea but if you're really concerned about always (usually) being able to call for help, you probably should have a personal locator beacon.
There is a shift in attitude though. I was having an online discussion with someone who basically said they'd be terrified if they couldn't call for help and, for me, that's the default assumption if I'm away from civilization.
Around where I live (in Massachusetts) there are a ton of local parks and forests that have trails on their paper maps/websites that aren't on OSM--although it's gotten pretty good. (And, in fact, there are some unofficial trails on OSM that aren't on published maps. In the UK my experience is that the OS maps are often better than OSM in a variety of ways.
Which are awesome. I also carry the Tyvek maps. (And I suspect a number of "just use your phone" people haven't actually bought the OS maps for the location in question.)
The main downside of a phone is is can have no signal or battery. People understand that downside well, and often prepare by bringing battery packs, solar chargers, offline maps apps, many phones in a group, etc.
The main downside of a paper map is you don't have the blue dot. People have less experience with it. Usually only 1 person in a group has purchased the expensive map.
When lost in adverse conditions, I'd give the group of inexperienced teenagers with a phone higher odds of getting home for dinner than those with a paper map.