The Big Answer -Young People And Social Media.

21/5.25

Thank you to everyone who took part in yesterday’s 24 hour Big Question poll and again my thanks for the many thoughtful comments you offered.

Interestingly 89 people, just over half the number who took part in last week’s Big Question on Pay Equity issue, chose to respond to yesterday’s question about regulating Social Media for young people.

I’m not quite sure what that means. It may be that it is not such a burning issue for readers or, as some have said, too complex an issue to have a firm view on. More of that in a moment

The results were as follows

69% Regulate the platform

21% Educate use

9% Ban

2% Leave things as they are.

What we should do about the influence social media is having, especially on young people is a complex question, which is why I offered at least 4 choices. I also did not say this week that readers had to choose just one option. It was possible to choose more than one, such as to regulate the platforms and also educate the use of social media, or leave things as they are and educate use.

What seems clear is that an outright ban isn’t going to be the vote grabber perhaps the Prime Minister is hoping for, and the issue clearly needs a lot more cross-party conversation and informed public input and debate before banning under 16- year- olds from social media is legislated

Frankly I don’t see a lot of informed debate happening at present, despite there being no shortage of good information on the net if you hunt for it.

For example there’s been a lot of reports done in Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada revealing a broad agreement that a ban may not address the risks social media presents for young people having to deal with issues such as cyberbullying, posts related to disordered eating or self-harm, hate speech, and spending long hours scrolling or “doomscrolling”

The overall verdict of the many reports is that we need a much more thoughtful response than just a ban and that only a coordinated approach between governments, regulators, tech companies and consulting young people themselves will address youth mental health and online safety.

So far, so good. But without pre-empting what such a think- tank might come up with, what practical solutions could this coordinated group consider?

Well, age-checking seems problematic.

The Australian federal government has passed the buck to social media companies for actually implementing age verification of users, demanding that platforms must take “reasonable steps” to restrict access by under-16s.However it’s unclear what these steps will be and the prospect of facial recognition or digital ID checks raises serious privacy concerns.

There is also the fact that teens will find ways around such a ban driving them to less regulated online spaces, including online forums such as the notorious 4Chan, where some pages have an explicit “no rules” policy.

It is also important to acknowledge that many young people find support fromcommunities on social media and taking that away may present risks to their mental health in these circumstances.

So let’s just park all that for a moment and do what Professor John Quiggin of Brisbane University invites us to do, and think about who owns the huge platforms that carry the social media. The tech giants who are making billions out of data manipulation and advertising and in who’s interest it is to resist such policies as age regulation.

One solution Quiggin offers is to create a publicly owned alternative platform,” playing the same role as did the ad free ABC with respect to radio and TV”

He also poses the highly relevant question- Can we fix digital media for everyone, not just kids?

If you are interested in what he has to say here is a link to the last in a series of posts he has made on the subject

Repost: Australia's social media ban for under-16s: Can we fix digital media for everyone, not just kids

So let’s have an informed discussion set up by government about this social issue, rather than knee- jerk political opinions.

And hey, maybe such a discussion could even invite young people to have input to into the policy formation as they could offer practical, real-world insights into what would work and what wouldn’t.

Too radical? Too democratic? Too far from the current Coalition’s behaviour of making executive decisions under urgency and to hell with getting input from people whose lives will be immediately impacted by their decisions?

If National MP Catherine Wedd’s private members bill about age restricting social media is actually drawn from the ballot, I hope we do have a robust select committee hearing, followed by a conscience vote – maybe that way we can have the kind of informed discussion this important topic deserves.

The Big Question is a regular feature on my Substack which aims to stimulate discussion about who we are and what we stand for as a people.

The poll is open to paid subscribers only and for 24hrs

My thanks you to my paid subscribers for making my public journalsim possible, helping me to keep speaking truth to power and giving a voice to those who have none. I appreciate your support.

If you are receiving this post for free, please consider upgrading to paid. For $9 a month (less than a cup of coffee each week) you will not only give you access to all my documentaries and premium posts, you will get to join a group of New Zealanders in our chatroom who comment on posts and discuss the issues that are important to all us who want to live in a fairer,more democratic society.

Please also restack and share posts you find worthwhile as it all helps to build ridership.