From 10 December, in Australia, under-16s are banned from social media. I’m not convinced that this is the cure-all safety response that the government wants us to believe it is. It’s a simple solution for what is a much bigger problem. Digital spaces have become an unregulated playground dominated by the interests of billionaires. Even though our photos and personal details make us feel like the playground is ours, our digital doors are open, our data is on their doorstep and the flags that claim ownership belong to them, not us.
And governments, who continually show an unwillingness to hold the super wealthy to account, are more tied to prescriptive policy that delivers optics rather than real change.
Real change means making social media GENUINELY safer. Not banning kids.
Australia’s under-16 social media ban sends a signal to the world that we accept that digital spaces are not safe. That they are places that can potentially cause harm to vulnerable users. That algorithms funnel young boys into radicalising spaces that fuel misogyny and violence. That social media exposes young people to cyberbullying and harassment. That paedophiles use digital spaces to pose as children to groom real children. This is scary. I agree. We can’t ignore the dangers posed by the dark shadows that thrive in these unregulated spaces.
But why are we targeting teenagers via a ban instead of the core business of social media platforms? Why are we letting the platforms get away with monetising a cesspool of hatred and division used to power algorithms to sell us shit and farm our prejudice? It’s the equivalent of saying ‘the streets are dangerous. Don’t wear a short skirt. Don’t walk at night. You might get raped.’ Well, you get raped in a long skirt. Because the streets are dangerous – to everyone who’s on them. Especially women. So let’s make the streets safer. Both real and digital.
Because when you are 16 years old, you are still as at risk as you were the day before your birthday. And so are all vulnerable people. And so are women. And so are trans men and women. And so are First Nations people. And so are people of colour. And so on and so on.
So are Facebook and Tik Tok and Instagram and the other big ten platforms having to comply with this new ban going to moderate and take responsibility for dangerous and hate-filled algorithms? No. Just don’t let under-16s into your grotty club.
But don’t worry. If the identified platforms don’t comply with the age verification they face up to $50 million in fines. How this will be patrolled and enforced isn’t completely clear. And how are we going to age-verify young people? What kind of data is collected, and what are the protections for young people in this part of the process?
In a recent article in The Guardian, it was cited that Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, would not disclose how it plans to determine which users it ‘understands’ to be under 16, arguing that would potentially alert teens on how to avoid the ban. Other platforms talked about ‘multi-layered’ approaches, but it seems, if government is going to ban, maybe they need to oversee ‘verification’ as it seems like the most critical and potentially risky part of the process. Particularly when you’re talking about data and kids.
On reading this, don’t think I am championing kids using social media platforms. I understand the risk. I’ve read a lot about the harms (and I accept some of the benefits). I also understand that kids will just move to other platforms, as we haven’t tackled the actual elephant in the room: privately-owned tech that monetises what should be a public digital space is always going to cause harm.
Because super rich pricks always want to make more money.
Digital communication is the language of younger generations, and creating safety in the platforms, rather than kicking them out, seems to me a much bolder and transformative approach.
Don’t ban under-16s. Ban billionaires profiteering from our digital commons.
Make our digital spaces genuinely safe.
The Echo’s coverage of political issues will remain as comprehensive and fair as it has ever been, outside this opinion column which, as always, contains Mandy’s personal opinions only.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
