Australia has proposed banning social media for children under the age of 16, with penalties for tech companies that don’t comply. 

Backlash against this idea has centered on the problem of enforcing age verification, which would affect all users, not just kids. 

Aside from that, there is a lot of nitpicking about the academic research not calling for a ban (despite overwhelming evidence that social media causes addiction, mental illness, a loss of autonomy, food illnesses, cyber-bullying and radicalization for teenagers). If enough problems are identified then a ban becomes a logical outcome, even if not called for by academics. Academics are also not policymakers. 

As someone who grew up as social media was taking off, I lived as a teenager before and after the introduction of social media. At the time, a lot of teenagers hated the new technology. Immediately, I saw a difference in how people acted: more narcissistic, more self-centered, less caring, more image conscious. 

A decade later, many people started deleting their social media accounts. If social media is so great, it’s unclear why people en masses started deleting their accounts. What this points to is a realization amongst many that social media is a negative part of their lives. 

There are other parts of the internet (hobby groups, community groups) that do not have this negative impact.  It has been clear from the start that social media is not about socializing. Messaging boards, hobby groups and even dating apps are actual – social – technologies. 

Social media is an attention technology, programmed for addiction, that rewards narcissism above community. It’s very unclear why we should ever defend such a technology.

Our society would function better without it. 

#SocialMediaban #auslaw #auspol #australia #techresearch #techregulation #eulaw