Alcohol can become addictive and risky for those around you when used inappropriately. That’s why it’s regulated, including the age at which consumers are allowed to purchase. Research has also found that the younger the age people begin using or experimenting with alcohol, the more likely they are to have an alcohol abuse problem later in life. Alcohol is but one example of a product that is restricted by age. Driving is another. It is not controversial that kids are not allowed to drive until age 16. Neither is it hard to understand why youngsters are not allowed to buy alcohol or cigarettes until they reach adulthood. The argument goes that children and teenagers lack the maturity to understand the risks of addictive products like alcohol and tobacco. Some public officials are now arguing that social media is too addictive for younger kids.
A proposal in Australia would ban social media accounts for people under the age of 16, according the Wall Street Journal. That’s right, no Facebook, no Instagram, no Snapchat, no TikTok. YouTube would be restricted to YouTube Kids. The Wall Street Journal talked to one mother who won’t even let her 13-year-old daughter have a cellphone, lest she use it to watch videos that negatively affect her body image. I wonder if her teenager has sneak peeks at Teen Vogue like boys in the 1970s would sneak picks at Playboy. Her mother supports the ban, believing it will make it easier for mothers to keep their kids away from social media’s harmful effects. Here is what WSJ had to say:
Australia wouldn’t include a parental consent option for those under 16, and children under 16 who already have social-media accounts wouldn’t be grandfathered in. Australian officials said there would be some exemptions, for platforms such as Google’s YouTube Kids.“Social media is doing harm to our children and I’m calling time on it,” Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said. “I’ve spoken to thousands of parents, grandparents, aunties and uncles. They, like me, are worried sick about the safety of our children online.”
Wow! Worried sick? That may sound surreal but it’s a serious proposal. Earlier I wrote that numerous state attorneys general are suing social media companies for the supposed harm done to children and teenagers’ mental health. Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg was personally sued by a couple dozen people but a federal judge just ruled he isn’t personally liable for social media addiction in children. This could change and his company could be found liable for billions of dollars in damages depending on whether a jury is in the mood to be generous. More from the Wall Street Journal:
Research suggests mental-health difficulties are becoming more common among young people and that there is a link between social-media use and psychological problems like depression and anxiety. Other research shows content and features within social media can be a major factor in escalating the risk of eating disorders. Some studies indicate that users can come across content about self-harm by accident, researchers say.Social-media companies, however, argue the scientific evidence hasn’t shown a causal link between social-media use and worse mental-health outcomes among young people. Currently, many of the companies require users to be at least 13 years old to create an account.
I’ve written about the supposed mental health crisis caused by social media in the past. There are many unanswered questions. Does social media cause mental health problems in kids or do kids with mental health deficits gravitate to social media? Are kids really addicted to social media or does social media address a preexisting need in young people (and older ones)? I’ve heard similar arguments that social media is bad for adults because it encourages them to stay home and interact on social media rather than get out and meet other people in person. Supposedly peoples’ mental health deteriorates from a lack of social interaction because social media is to human interaction what empty calories are to healthy nutrition. Also, what are kids supposed to do with all their new free time? If proponents expect kids untethered from social media will suddenly begin studying harder, engaging in outdoor activities and reading Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys novels in their spare time they are sadly mistaken.