Australia took the extraordinary step of banning access to social media for children under 16. This article explains their rationale and the steps the government is taking to enforce the ban.
It’s hard to imagine that the U.S. would impose such a ban. We can’t even get parents to agree to vaccinate their children, even though the safety of vaccines has been demonstrated for decades. Some parents would oppose a ban because they want to know their children can contact them in the event of a crisis or emergency. Maybe Australia will develop cell phones that permit communication only between parents and children, children and 911, controlled by parents, not the big tech companies.
Madison Burgess writes:
The world’s first social media ban begins today (December 10), and people are already flagging problems.
If you missed the news, don’t panic. It currently only affects under-16s in Australia, so if you’re elsewhere in the world, feel free to scroll to your heart’s content.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese welcomed the rule but warned the implementation would be difficult.
He told the Australian Broadcasting Corp: “This is the day when Australian families are taking back power from these big tech companies, and they’re asserting the right of kids to be kids and for parents to have greater peace of mind.
“This reform will change lives. For Australian kids… allowing them to just have their childhood. For Australian parents, enabling them to have greater peace of mind.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
There a lot of people much older than 16 whose use of media have turned them down dark paths. My chief worry is not a 13 year old on instagram but a 55 year old on Facebook. These old people don’t know how to process electronic misinformation, which leads to massive support for right wing groups advocating all sorts of political views based on false information. At some point, there may appear similar groups on the left, although I am unaware of much activity there now.
Maybe we should just hold platforms responsible for false or harmful information.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“He told the Australian Broadcasting Corp: “This is the day when Australian families are taking back power from these big tech companies, and they’re asserting the right of kids to be kids and for parents to have greater peace of mind.”
This is a load of horse hocky. The tech companies aren’t forcing kids to go on social media. Kids already had the right to not use it and families already had the right to prohibit their kids from using it.
People have this notion that if we ban social media, everything will be hunky-dory and kids will go outside and play like they used to. But the fact is the problem is exactly the opposite. Kids are hardly allowed to go outside and play anymore (“it’s too dangerous!” we cry, even though it’s far safer today than it was in the times when kids were running around unsupervised), so the only way for kids to hang out with each other without adults constantly in their business is online. Taking away social media had immediate and negative impacts on mental health, as demonstrated by the system overload the Australian crisis hotlines have been experiencing ever since.
If we actually let kids be kids, they’d be allowed to go to playgrounds and malls by themselves. We don’t allow kids a shred of independence, but then when they turn 18 and they don’t miraculously become independent, we blame them for being immature. Fact is, we don’t want kids to be kids. We want them to be completely controlled and programmed, to turn them into good cogs for the capitalist world.
LikeLike
There are enough stressors in modern life that we do not need to allow intrusive on-line platforms to contribute to the chaos. My daughter was a very overly sensitive teenager that was bullied in high school. I am glad that there was no social media during her most vulnerable period. Her father and I did everything we could to protect her including working with the school and providing many years of therapy. She is now a mid-life mother who remains ultra-sensitive, but she is a stable, functioning adult.
“A government study found that as many as 96% of children aged 10-15 used social media, with seven out of 10 exposed to harmful content ranging from misogynistic material and fight videos to content promoting eating disorders and suicide.”
Although it is difficult to enforce, I commend Australia for taking a stand to protect its children instead of ceding to the “free market, free for all” of big business.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This “test” is long overdue. Have not the Amish already tried this? Has any other community? Has a cost benefit analysis been done on allowing sub-16 youths free access to “social media”?
LikeLike
You seriously want to model public policy on the Amish? Maybe talk to people who have left the faith? Talk about mental health problems….
LikeLike
One way to achieve this might be to ban smart phones for kids and only permit them to have flip phones, since flip phones don’t have touch screens, so communicating with text and on the Internet are much MUCH more challenging on there. I have both and I prefer the flip phone because Google is not in control of my flip phone. (I hate the way Google took over my Android smart phone, so that should be addressed too!) I’m also not bombarded with Ads on my flip phone like I’ve been on smart phones. (Sorry, I can’t speak to Apple devices.)
LikeLike
Sorry, “because I could never afford Apple products” got cut off at the end of my post above.
Also, this issue should be addressed on computers, too, like laptops, desktops and tablets, since kids have access to social media on those devices as well.
BTW, without a touch screen, mouse, cursor or other pointing device on flip phones, you can’t click on links. You also have to go through the alphabet that’s on each of the number keys, in order to write texts –which has been incredibly slow going on every flip phone I’ve owned…
LikeLike
When someone sends a link to me on my flip phone, without a touch screen or pointing device, I can’t just click on it and go there. I find it too challenging to remember the link, too, and I cannot even open another window to go back and forth to it. I would have write it out somewhere, and then type it in using the number keys –all of which are HUGE pains, so I always ignore links anyone sends on my flip phone.
LikeLike
You just outline huge drawbacks to using flip phones. If you feel it’s important to you to handicap yourself this way, that’s your choice. But I don’t see why it’s your choice to deny other people or other people’s kids modern approaches which are part of the world we live in.
LikeLike
I’m a retired teacher who has had decades of experience using technology, which is why I was asked to teach many Technology in Education courses. I use other devices instead of my flip phone to text, email and surf the NET, and I think that works fine for adults, but I don’t think that children should have unfettered access to the Internet. Flip phones would be a way of limiting their access when adults are not around to readily monitor and control where they go and what they do on the Internet.
LikeLike
When I was that age, some people wanted to ban rock and roll, Mad Magazine and numerous books and comic books. In earlier time I imagine people thought jazz and pulp fiction should have been banned for children. If you are concerned for your child… talk with him or her. Otherwise, mind your own business. 🤗
LikeLike
Thank you!!
LikeLike
Ramen!! Ned!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ban ramen? Grin
LikeLike
These concerns are not new! In the nineties and early 2000s, I taught technology courses at a few colleges, including one where I was a full time professor and Program Coordinator for 4 years, and these issues around children came up all the time then.
I created my own website on the college server, where I listed MANY resources for students, and I also set up ways for students to communicate with me and fellow students, including live. My college wanted to know if that was “social media!” I had to explain to them that it was purely educational –which I thought was ridiculous, because it was so obvious and they could have easily looked at it and seen what it was all about.
There were no smart phones then (and PDAs were big), but I had a flip phone, laptop and desktop computers and the issues were primarily about children on such devices.
LikeLike
BTW, Understandably, at the time, easy access to porn sites was of primary concern.
LikeLike
That is still a concern, too. See: “Supreme Court allows law requiring age checks for porn sites” https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-allows-law-requiring-age-checks-for-porn-sites/ar-AA1HxZWt
LikeLike
It really enrages me that this matter has dragged on for so long. While states sought to address it, with age verification laws, effectively it took over 25 years to reach the Supreme Court –earlier this year! https://ondato.com/blog/adult-content-age-verification-laws/
LikeLike
OK, long post on our parenting on this issue, FWIW.
We were lucky that our kids grew up in a window of time when social media was gradually evolving—just barely getting started when they were preteens. Those early experiences were forums dedicated to special interests. At about ages 8-10-12 [3 sons], they found video-game forums focused on new Japanese games not yet available here. They could somehow [don’t ask] access & play those games, while discussing with other players on international game-related forums. (I loved that they were picking up Japanese and French phrases in the process.) Within the next year or so, myspace became available: our boys were musicians, and music was the core of myspace.
They developed as musicians early, and that was aided by our parenting regarding screen use in general. Hand-held videogame devices were verboten until about age 12. Thanks to techie husband we had instead a home network stocked with educational & non-violent fun games. Their computer located in living room where we could restrict usage time/ monitor content. Meanwhile plenty of time to take lessons/ acquire instruments/ form bands. [My youngest had a metal band at age 11, & by 13yo was using ACID program on living room computer to arrange music, and create instrumental ‘beats’ as his interest shifted to hip-hop].
We also were strict about TV channels, restricting viewing to PBS kidshows, & gradually, Nickelodeon (tho we made our opinions known about edgy shows like Ren and Stimpy). One TV, in kitchen/ dining/ TV-watching room [none in bedrooms!]. Cell phones of any kind [no smart-phones yet in general use] not until high school.
As social media developed into FB et al, sons somehow osmosed healthy skepticism as to its uses/ veracity of posts, etc. They ended up using social media primarily as a vehicle for promoting their bands/ performance schedules. Otherwise, as passing news/ greetings among FB “friends” only.
My experience is that parenting on these issues needs to be assertive, & accompanied by much discussion about family values, what’s healthy, etc. And we were lucky that our kids had close-friend families who were equally concerned [& did stuff like electronics-free weekends every month].
The scene is far more difficult for parents today. The peer pressure in nbhds where even young kids carry smartphones must be intense. They’re certainly not helping things if they model constant monitoring of smart-phone communications.
We found the approach of “our family’s values” helpful. We are the ___s, and this is how we do things,” with plenty of Q&A, discussion, & emphasizing that this was all about helping their devpt—with open-mindedness to their ideas/ negotiation, but drawing lines in sand, where they just had to trust we knew what we were doing. This helps give them a sense of solidarity/ teamship. Without ever denigrating other families’ choices.
LikeLiked by 1 person