Resurrected the blog so I can post the text of another letter to my MP. She’s just posted a survey to constituents about a social media ban. It’s nice to have that, but didn’t leave me much room for explanation about my concerns. So I wrote all this out. Feel free to steal all or bits of it for yourself.
Dear Ms Cadbury,
I much appreciate the survey you’ve sent out to collect feelings on social media for under 16s and adults, and whether a ban is appropriate.
While the survey is much appreciated, I didn’t find I had the opportunity in it to give a more detailed response to why I am very much against a ban despite me having concerns about the impact of social media and the internet more generally on under 16s.
There are two particular key points:
- a ban can only be implemented by an age check which requires adults to give details, making anonymous use of parts of social media much more difficult, impacting the ability of people to speak out freely there without facing undue repercussions, e.g. ‘doxxing’ and harrassment, and requiring more and more personal data to be put online where it may be stolen in hacks.
- social media has upsides and downsides for under 16s. While there is harmful content out there, there is much community building for children in minority groups who are isolated, or those seeking support for mental health in situations where they are not in a position to turn to their parents or guardians.
I’m worried about a broad attack on internet access for children, where it’s an important skill to learn and an important resource for them to seek help. When I watch the campaign of Esther Ghey to introduce a social media or phone ban for children, I am deeply concerned as her daughter was killed by people she knew in real life, and not simply by social media. Discussing Brianna’s own use of social media is a deeply worrying form of victim blaming. In https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68494417 it is said that
“Brianna, who was transgender, struggled with her mental health, a situation exacerbated by accessing eating-disorder and self-harm content online.”
That Brianna found such content is more likely a result of her unfortunate mental health, rather than a cause of it. These reports persistently ignore the safe and supportive communities she found.
According to https://xtramagazine.com/power/politics/brianna-ghey-social-media-trans-youth-263868 she in fact met her killers offline, not online:
“Brianna was an isolated, bullied trans child, more endangered within her real-life environment than her online one—her “inclusivity unit” classes for vulnerable students were where she met her killers. Her vulnerability was inextricable from her position as a trans child. “
Online social communities can be a lifeline for isolated, abused, or bullied children. Taking that away is harmful in itself.
I’d encourage reading the writings of neuroscientist Dr Dean Burnett on social media and phone use, starting perhaps at https://theneuroscienceofeverydaylife.substack.com/p/what-smartphones-are-doing-to-kids
The situation is far from as simple as going for an outright social media ban. Sensible limits in school and at home, and parental controls are a more appropriate way to go forward than blanket bans that may do more harm than good, and leave over 16s suddenly exposed to social media with no experience in avoiding abusive behaviour by learning to block accounts early, and by developing the skills to spot misinformation.
Moving more to the second point, the Online Safety Act has already had widescale unintended negative effects by forcing age gating. It’s resulting in the blocking of sexual health material, anti-smoking material, forces adults to put personal information in the hands of providers from which it may be stolen in hacks, and more. It limits freedom of expression to under 18s, and pushes children to less regulated spaces by techniques that are trivially achievable to a kid with a little know-how, and while not using commercial VPNs that others are seeking bans for as well. A range of these points are summarised well at https://action.openrightsgroup.org/tell-your-mp-online-safety-act-isn’t-working
The OSA has resulted in the end of UK access for all to commonplace image sharing site imgur.com, breaking large parts of the internet where it is commonly used for hosting. It shut down a forum dedicated to keeping hamsters as pets. It shut down a cycling forum, one on sustainable living, and more. This social media ban will further disrupt the ability of communities to form online, and not just for children, and not just for those seeking adult content.
I beg you to listen to the concerns of those seeing the unwanted side effects of these overly blunt legal instruments, and more importantly still the voices of vulnerable and marginalised groups who seek to find community and mutual support online, including children. This ban will not make bullying disappear, and it will not stop further tragic events from particularly extreme forms of abuse.
What we need if anything is far more information and education for children to learn how to protect themselves online, and more information for parents on useful methods to help children be safe online. Skills that will not hurt their ability to find support, and will leave them in much better stead to face the online world as adults as well.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.