Social Media Ban in the UK for under 16s

I’ve been thinking a lot about this and I finally decided to share my thoughts.

I think the problem is still a bit more complex than “social media is bad”, “government should not decide these things” and “social media ban is stupid”.

Do kids need the external influence of parties trying to serve their own interests? From ads using misleading information to convince them of problems that they don’t need to worry about just to buy products?

Should they be exposed to an iterative and recursive algorithm that continues to serve them content within the same sphere of influence or should they be exposed to broader catalog of viewpoints?

Should topics found in one platform follow them to other platforms?

Does limiting their social media circle to just their peers actually help, or does it localise competition, anti-social behaviour and increase cyber bullying risks?

How do you vet accounts to prevent abusers masquerading as kids?

Do kids need to be exposed to a rating system for their lives? Likes, and inversely, lack of likes, still creates pressure and starts the process of reliance on digital affirmation. Slippery slope.

During an age where kids are even more susceptible to influences, while they’re still learning and discovering the moral ambiguities involved in every situation, when they’re still trying to discover their own ethics, social media forces them down a path.

The most worrisome aspect of it is that a majority of kids don’t even know it’s happening. Nor do the social media platforms provide any kind of escape from it.

It’s very easy for adults who lived during the evolution of social media to overlook or disregard the dangers. Especially because we “survived” it. The problem is exactly that though. We were early adopters. We watched our feeds and timelines grow just our peers, to the state it is in now.

We understand, to an extent, the technologies that are now driving social media platforms. We encountered a “safe” internet, that was not as prevalent, into something that is now an expectation.

We lived through waves of new exploits, attacks, scams, abuse strategies. We are aware.

Kids coming through do not have that. They don’t know life without internet. They don’t know life that isn’t as interconnected as it is now. They haven’t grown up learning the different forms of attack that were discovered and exposed.

Kids now and the kids moving into the category that is banned, are being hammered by adults and adult content creators about life expectations. About glamorous lifestyles. Perfect this, and perfect that.

That immediately raises 2 problems:

1. What are the motives of this adult, who is a complete stranger, and why are kids being targeted by their content?
2. There’s no nuance about the reality of life, versus picture perfect expectations created by individuals trying to profit from views and engagement.

Kids do not need to grow up with that kind of pressure. Parents should not have to deal with kids expecting more from them when the parents are already doing everything they can to provide for the kids.

Kids navigating social and romantic relationships should not be influenced by unrealistic expectations of an ideal partner as defined by a random stranger online.

Under 16 years of age, kids do not have enough of a well rounded education and life experience to navigate what social media has become. Adults barely have it. Attention spans have fallen dramatically because of the instant gratification presented by some platforms. Don’t like the content within 1 sec? Scroll to the next. And the next.

Connecting with friends does not require a social media platform. What happened to phone numbers? Talking to friends is not the issue here, and the ban explicitly doesn’t ban apps that provide that.

Should the government enforce this level of control on kids lives? Does this indicate an authoritarian government? Is this step 1 of a wider plan to enforce censorship online?

Maybe. But I think it would be ludicrous to boil those questions down to a ban on social media. The government has a duty of care to its citizens. We don’t turn our noses up at laws around gambling being over 18s only, that alcohol can only be purchased and consumed by over 18s, that cigarettes and vales can only be purchased and used by over 18s.

Why the duplicity?

Because the wider population know and can see the dangers of those. They know it would be wrong for kids to partake and use those substances.

It raises the concern that many adults probably don’t understand the dangers of social media. The duration isn’t there even for adults.

So no, I don’t think the government deciding to step in and take action on this is cause for concern around government control.

I agree that “simply banning” and walking away solves nothing.

More education is required. More education about online realities and dangers is required. More education on the technologies and the motives behind the technologies is required.

I think, more importantly, systemic change about how social media platforms operate is required.

But while we learn what that looks like? While we put those resources together? While we try to find the funding to provide that education in schools?

I think I’m happy enough with a blanket ban while we figure things out.