Following recent moves by the Australian government to ban children under 16 years of age from using social media, the debate on the matter has again gained momentum, with differing opinions and views, while the science on the issue remains opaque.
Australia is set to become the first country to introduce legislation to enforce the social media ban for kids, while many other countries and states have been debating the effect of too much “screen time for children”, with mixed results.
In the US, at least two states, Florida and Utah, have bills restricting minors’ social media use.
The Governor of Arkansas, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, has also encouraged fellow governors in other states to come together to limit social media and screen use for kids and encourage outdoor play. She cited a recent book by Jonathan Haidt entitled, “The Anxious Generation”.
In Arkansas, the Social Media Safety Act was also passed, which requires parental consent for minors to create new social media accounts.
The Australian model will place the onus on social media companies to take reasonable steps to block people under 16, as opposed to parental consent.
Social media has become a pervasive feature of everyday life, spawning generations of so-called influencers who monetize their quirks, crafts and hobbies, while newsmakers and the media have become heavily reliant on it as a source of information.
What started as a way to connect with friends and family, gradually morphed into what we see today; a deluge of fake news, AI and propaganda.
For the easily manipulated, it can be a minefield to navigate.
Besides the obvious problems of falling for fake news and being scammed, the reasoning behind the drive to limit social media usage for children and teens is the negative mental health impacts this is purported to be having on them.
The problem is that research suggests quite the opposite – that 99.6% of a child’s mental well-being has nothing to do with how much time they spend on their devices.
In other words, global mental health survey data gathered in 168 countries across 18 years suggest there is no causal relationship between the introduction of the Internet and the well-being of young people.
In addition, policing social media bans will be tricky, as children are likely to find loopholes to any technology that may be introduced, like age verification, biometrics and the like.
Parental responsibility and education seem the most obvious solution. Parents need to talk openly to their teens about the dangers of social media, while also prioritising family time.
It doesn’t help if parents are constantly doom-scrolling or posting on social media while preaching the opposite. Common sense is key.
A global grassroots movement, called Smartphone Free Childhood has gained traction including in South Africa, encouraging parents to sign a pact to say no to smartphones for their children, until at least high school.
Proponents of the movement argue exposing children to things their brains aren’t yet developed enough to deal with, can cause a whole host of problems, from triggering anxiety and eating disorders to opening the door to cyberbullying or sexual predators.
The bottom line is that every child, pre-teen and adolescent will need parental guidance and trying to legislate the matter is unlikely to have the desired effect.
