Banning social media: Safety net or overstep?

Next week, the UK government plans to announce a new restriction on children’s access to social media. There are several options being considered, but it’s likely to be a full ban on all social media for everyone under 16 years old. As a mum, I couldn’t be more supportive – but as an American, I’m a little conflicted. 

The purpose of the ban is to protect children. Studies have shown how harmful social media is for teenagers and it’s gotten worse with the addition of AI, which has now been tied to mass shootings and suicides.   

Support for the ban is nearly unanimous. When government consulted on the proposal earlier this spring, there were 200,000 respondents, making it the second largest consultation since equal marriage, and 90% supported a full ban.  

There is widespread international support as well. Australia was the first to take action, with a ban for under 16s that took effect 6 months ago, and Greece enacted a ban for under 15s that will take effect next year. Canada is considering something less strict, whereby tech firms could avoid the ban if they can prove their platforms are not harmful.  

However, the US Embassy put out a memo last week against the proposed ban. It argued that it might not be technically possible, and that the requirements would disproportionately harm American companies. Instead, they suggested more parental controls and encouraging ‘healthy options’.  

As a mum, I am completely supportive of a ban. Firstly, I’ve seen my children easily get around parental controls meant to restrict screen time or access to content. As parental controls are designed to be implemented by parents, it’s shockingly easy for someone who is more tech savvy (i.e. anyone in Gen Alpha) to get around them.  

Secondly, I’ve seen parents crumble on issues like this before. In my own child’s class, all parents agreed to a ban on mobile phones, but it immediately broke when one parent bought a phone for her child, who really wanted one, and then all the others followed suit. No one wants their child to be left out. Thirdly, I just don’t trust the tech companies to do what’s best, they will always be guided by their profit margins.  

As an American, I’m more conflicted. It’s convenient to paint all social media as harmful, but of course there are benefits too, which is why it’s so popular. Freedom of speech is a basic right, and these are platforms for self-expression, where you can connect and build healthy relationships. Freedom of the press is also extremely important; more and more people use social media as their main source of news and information, and cutting that off could be akin to authoritarian governments shutting down the internet in times of conflict. There is also a slippery slope argument for government overreach, if we first ban access to social media, is access to WhatsApp or texting next? Parents have responsibility to protect their children and do what they think is best for their families.    

Next week, I expect to see the ban passed, with international allies following along with similar policies. I think this will help protect our teenagers, but would also expect a lot of further discussion about it going both not far enough and too far, at the same time. As social media and AI use continue to grow into new aspects of our lives, this is a topic to continue to watch closely.  I, for one, will continue to watch this space with sceptical support.