Banning under 16’s from Social media. Go

[Lemondrizzle4A]

The government are consulting the public regarding banning social media for under 16’s.
If interested this is the link.
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/growing-up-in-the-online-world-a-national-consultation

Have you seen the link at the top of the page inviting MNers to write to their MP about this?

I actually heard Justine from MN being interviewed on radio 4 about this issue a couple of days ago and she was talking about the percentage of MN users who supported the ban. Which surprised me because as a regular MN user I certainly didn't think I had been asked my opinion. As it happens though I do very much support the ban.

I will have a look at your link OP.

I agree with the ban.

Go? No.

A foolish idea that will be difficult, if not impossible, to police effectively. My MP has been told I emphatically do NOT support it.

Yes

It’s the right thing to do for children. It will make social media companies accountable in a way they never have been.

I support this. It will give parents leverage when rationalising with their teens about why they can’t have certain apps. Social media apps such as Snapchat are extremely dangerous to immature minds (and some maturer ones) and I am certain we will look back on this and be aghast that we let a whole generation of children access these addictive and dangerous apps. I have a 13 year old and I am not budging on TikTok or Snapchat - I’d welcome a legal backing but if it doesn’t happen she still isn’t having them.

Agreed.

It ALL depends on HOW they propose to ban it. If it's just the same "lazy" ban that was introduced re online porn, then it's utterly pointless as everyone who wants to watch porn now simply uses a VPN. If they did the same with social media, all that would happen is that under 16's would use a VPN - they'd be telling each other how to do it in the school playground! (Like they do with porn and how they watch overseas viewing of UK premier league football for free!). Kids today are way ahead of us adults as to how to get around these things.

I'm strongly against much online screen use for kids (that recent Guardian piece by a 15 year old girl was chilling) and in theory support a ban - an idealised version of one which I'm not sure can be created. To reiterate, I'm probably more intolerant of most screen use by developing brains than the majority - I think even 'safe' or 'educational' use is not safe for sight, posture and more. And, as Yuja rightly says, the ban would confirm the establishment view which is helpful as leverage. But I was surprised to see MN's support for the ban, because haven't serious privacy concerns been raised about it? I wouldn't want support expressed under these kinds of campaigns to be interpreted as a carte blanche to destroy what's left of anonymity online. Are we all going to have to prove our identities or use VPNs to access Mumsnet, for example? That's me off (no great loss for you all, naturally, but a loss for people like me who appreciate mostly female spaces). Shouldn't MN assume some responsibility for not encouraging a new culture where we unwisely share our personal info with online companies? Would be good if MN could clarify how they have weighed up the pros and cons.

If only parents in every school had the energy and time to club together and enforce a ban. The obstacle to parental authority being effective against unhealthy screen use seems to be lack of community amongst parents (very understandably, considering the pressures of modern life). So we immediately jump to a legal alternative. But would a massive government public info campaign help more than a legal ban? e.g. 'THINK before you buy your poor 10 y.o. a bloody smartphone', but clever (you will be relieved to hear my job is not in marketing)

After watching Molly v the Machines, documentary about Molly Russell, im 100%now for a ban for under 16s.

My dd 15 and her friends reckon that the 'School wars thing is a government initiative to bring about a change in law. Cynical kids but at least they don't believe all they read online.

A ban, if it works, but I expect within 24 hours any teenager who wanted to know badly enough how to get round the van would, because there are always ways with the internet, it’s how it was designed. All a van in the UK will do is let social media platforms off the hook..

Parents already have the tools to ban apps from devices and turn devices off the wi-fi to times to suit.

And what happens at 16, GCSE year, all of a sudden they can log in, like kids in a toy shop, you have much less influence over what a 16 year old can do.

I completely agree that social media companies need to have the law changed to make them responsible for what is published on their platform.

Plus not all social media is bad for teens.

It will give parents a false sense of security with little reward.

It's the single best thing you could do for any child.
SM is toxic and damaging beyond belief.

I think banning it from the president of the United States right now would be much more effective for the safety of everyone

I agree with it but, like PPs, most teenagers would find a way around it, even the ones that aren't so savvy!

Watched it , gut wrenching. 😢

Other than it being difficult to police, what is your reasoning for this? Genuinely interested.

I also think that teenagers will find a way around it and have secret accounts. I have heard of some that have a secret phone and a normal phone. or a security phone if their parnts are too strict to give them a phone. It's a minefield. The best we can do is keep a close eye and educate them. I am not against a ban though. Would it include snapchat? WhatsApp?

I support it, not sure how to implement it and it would need parents on board properly

Most threads on this subject seem to suggest posters are not on board with it so I would imagine they would undermine any ban.

If you’re unsure where you stand on this, read The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt. It’s a raft of research and stats about elder Gen X who are now in their 20s. It’s how they were the first generation as children to have social media and it wasn’t policed at all and how that has shaped them as adults. After reading it I now feel incredibly sorry for Gen X and the new world of social media they had to navigate as kids.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpwn1vjy0y5o?app-referrer=deep-link

Molly’s dad is against a ban, for good reasons.

I agree. I don’t think a ban is the answer. Lots of children will get round a ban (as they have done in Australia) and it will give parents a false sense of security. I don’t know how, but the answer is to have tighter controls on what is available to view online, for any age group.

I can’t understand the logic of banning a 15 year old totally, and then giving a 16 year old free rein. It’s far safer to introduce social media gradually and to teach youngsters how to use it safely.

What is it with these demanding headlines? This isn’t school.

It should not be a measure in isolation if it happens. Harm does not reduce much once you are 16, even if the habit has not been formed.

I would have social media companies asked to have certain steps in place to act to reduce harm, or they are deemed to be jointly liable and considered publishers.