The Under-16s Social Media Ban – I've Changed My Mind. It's Very Bad!
When the news first broke, I was short-sighted — focused on the dangers rather than the benefits. Then my children challenged my thinking.
When the news first came out about the social media ban for under-16s, I was short-sighted. I focused on the dangers of social media rather than the benefits — which I assume is exactly what governments around the world pushing these bans are hoping people will do.
I thought about the mental health crisis, comparison culture, feelings of inadequacy and the risk of grooming, all of which I have experienced myself in one way or another.
I've since had conversations with my children, who do not have free access to social media because, well, my house, my rules. However, they do use YouTube under my and my husband's supervision to learn game development, animation, video editing, maths and much more. They also have a deep interest in history and current affairs.
They were troubled by this news — and they challenged me to think.
Are governments trying to control access to information, learning, news and freedom of expression?
After that enlightening conversation with my amazing children, whom I'm incredibly proud of, I've come to agree with their view. I'm concerned too.
I learned how to code, sew, knit and cook from YouTube. I get much of my news from independent media, and I encourage my children to explore different sources too so they can learn to think critically and avoid blindly accepting any single narrative.
With restrictions like this, governments gain greater influence over how people access information, learn and connect with one another. They also know that controlling access can:
- Encourage more people to submit personal information to prove their age.
- Influence how younger generations engage with politics and current affairs.
- Make it harder for young people to organise, communicate and mobilise around causes they care about.
Whether you agree with those outcomes or not, they are worth discussing openly.
My sons offered what I thought were some great alternatives. They said parents should supervise their children's internet use, just as we do. They suggested children do not need unrestricted access to smartphones and that devices could be handed to parents at bedtime to avoid late-night distractions. Funny enough, my boys argued that discipline should be encouraged instead of an outright ban.
Perhaps other countries that have resisted these types of restrictions have also recognised some of the benefits of open access to information and learning.
This ban does not just affect young people. It affects all of us because today's restrictions often become tomorrow's norms.
So yes, even though this is a blog about communication, awareness and watching our tone, I felt it was important to publicly acknowledge that my perspective has changed. My children challenged my thinking. They made points I couldn't ignore. And for now, I believe they were right and I was wrong.