Many countries are rushing to ban social media for children and young people, including Australia, Canada, Indonesia, Malaysia, and most recently France and the UK, where social media curfews for under-18s have been confirmed this month. It seems tides are turning after long delays and inaction towards online harms on social media, which have been known for a long time.
Despite new policies being introduced, there are deeper questions on accountability, inequalities, and power dynamics which remain unresolved by social media bans.
Evidence has shown that social media, and same platforms that dominate the development of AI, have been under-regulated despite spreading harms including discrimination, misinformation, violence against women and girls, systemic racism on global majority communities, and far-reaching attacks on democracy and the planetary ecosystems.
Recent social media bans, finally, provide long-overdue admissions by policymakers that these platforms are ‘harmful by design’, with features like infinite scrolling being addictive and micro-targeting algorithms manipulating attention. These are called ‘dark patterns’, meaning deliberate design choices that cause harm to users. Latest cases demonstrated that many consequences of these ‘dark patterns’, especially towards children, young people, and marginalised communities, were intentionally ignored by social media companies for profiteering.
But by merely banning social media, it leaves a real gap in accountability letting these companies off the hook. These platforms should have been made safe by design before becoming available to the public. A ban will only create a false sense that the issues are now fixed. But that will be far from being true.
{{/usCountry}}But by merely banning social media, it leaves a real gap in accountability letting these companies off the hook. These platforms should have been made safe by design before becoming available to the public. A ban will only create a false sense that the issues are now fixed. But that will be far from being true.
{{/usCountry}}This unsafe technology has grown so deeply and widely harmful, retro-fixing platform designs, and more importantly, user behaviours already developed, are going to be difficult and expensive. But the social media ban does not come close to fixing these issues, while allow platforms to carry on exactly as they are. We need to question: how does this protect people and how is this fair?
A social media ban is a ‘get out of jail’ card, allowing companies getting away with having deliberately designed technology and AI algorithms that are spreading harm and hate. Effectiveness of the ban has already been doubted in Australia, where two in three children and young people continue to access harmful content and ‘dark patterns’. So, concerns remain on why these ‘harmful by design’ features are still allowed on social media, despite clear evidence of their harms on adults, children, and young people.
What is less discussed is also how these companies have fine-tuned data mining and AI model training over a decade, which they will continue to monetise based on their negligence and harmful ‘dark patterns’ created. Social media bans do not address any consequences, redress, or accountability, while setting precedence that technological innovation is more important than damages to humanity itself.
More importantly, it is troubling the way that social media bans have been introduced in countries like the UK. All devolved nations children's commissioners, including Scotland's, opposed the ban. But also UNICEF, UN Human Rights Commission, Australian human rights commission, Council of Europe Human Rights Commission. They concluded that social media bans do not respect children's rights. This should be a lesson learned globally.
The UK’s policy consultation process did not include children, and the process was designed for adults, by adults and excluded children. This violate the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which is incorporated in Scots law, with article 12 stating children having a say in decisions that affect them is fundamental to upholding children's rights.
Research with children and youth has shown growing complexities in their everyday interactions intertwined with social media, described as a ‘trade off’ between digital connections versus giving away data and privacy. Many users are also increasingly troubled by the constant dilemma choosing between convenience provided by instant connections and risks of being subjected to harmful content online. These nuanced experiences have not been considered in the social media ban.
The 14th International Conference on Social Media and Society, the world’s first international conference on social media, was held in Glasgow, recently. It highlighted how communities and young people across the world are increasingly questioning what kind of future we want with social media platforms, algorithms, and AI. It remains unclear and unfelt by some of the most marginalised communities whether these technologies are delivering promises, and yet growing evidence of their harms are repeatedly ignored by policymakers.
We as a society must demand better, fairer, and more ethical ways of developing technology and AI. We need urgent actions from policymakers to tackle deeper questions about accountability together with people including children, youth, and communities affected by ‘harmful by design’ technologies, which should not only be banned but removed so people are genuinely protected from online harms.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored by Mark Wong, senior lecturer and head of social and urban policy, University of Glasgow.