The complexities of online safety
exploring the complexities of online safety. By caroline inge.
Over the centuries responsible governments have passed multiple laws to protect children.
In 1873 the first legislation was passed in Victoria that addressed child factory work. The age of consent was raised to 14 in NSW in 1883. Over the next 150 years many changes were made to protect children. The legal age for marriage was raised from 16 to 18. Children were banned from drinking and gambling. Corporal punishment in schools was forbidden. The state has legitimately sought to protect children from harm and exploitation when society has failed to do so.
Social media usage for youngsters can be dangerous; we always taught our children in the pre-social media age not to talk to strangers. This now happens all the time on social media.
The Coalition has called for government intervention through banning use of social media platforms for children and teenagers under the age of 16. This is a continuation of the state stepping in to prevent harm occurring to children and yes, to correct bad parenting.
Bad parents exist, and we cannot gamble with children’s safety by defending the right of someone to be a bad parent. Poor parenting costs the nation enormously in terms of wasted social capital and real capital.
Social media has exploded since the first iteration of “The Facebook” in 2004. Over the past 20 years, social media has matured into a juggernaut. It can generate positive effects such as learning, connecting, shopping, trading, renting ... but for all the good, there’s the counter balance of bad. Bullying, piles-on, grooming, scamming all happen on the small screen too. The Australian Federal Police have suggested that social media is being used to target young people for radicalisation.
Infinite scrolling, fed by manipulative algorithms and push notifications, can lead to compulsive-obsessive behaviours, anxiety and depression, and is particularly risky for young people, whose developing brains are less able to disengage from addictive experiences and are more sensitive to distractions.
According to US Surgeon General Dr Vivek Murthy, “... there is growing evidence that social media use is associated with harm to young people’s mental health. Children are exposed to harmful content on social media, ranging from violent and sexual content, to bullying and harassment. And for too many children, social media use is compromising their sleep and valuable in-person time with family and friends.”
Dr Daniel Siegel, who is clinical professor of psychiatry at the UCLA School of Medicine, contends the brain is the social organ of the body, and is directly impacted by social media usage. Human brains are not fully developed until 25 years of age, and Dr Siegel states that extensive use of social media can change the shape of a developing brain, effectively rewiring the way that person interacts with others and impacting their capacity to form relationships.
We've all heard anecdotes about the negative effect of social media on our young, but the statistics now confirm it.
A 2021 study, The Social Switch, conducted by the ANU and the City of London found that more than 70% of young people were exposed to content they found disturbing, including violent and explicit content, yet only 40% of them reported what they knew was inappropriate content to the platform. Children increasingly are being exposed to harmful content on portable devices like smart phones.
Another Australian survey of over 7000 children and parents found an extraordinary volume of children had participated in risky behaviours or negative experiences online:
Six in ten children have communicated with someone they first met online.
One in eight children have sent a photo or video of themselves to someone they first met online.
One in eight children have met someone face-to-face after first getting to know them online.
Close to half of the surveyed children were treated in a hurtful or nasty way online in the past year, while a quarter of the children had themselves treated someone in a hurtful or nasty way online.
One in ten children have been the target of hate speech online.
These statistics are alarming, but even worse is that although children do tell their parents about bullying behaviour online, as well as content about drug taking, suicide, self-harm and unhealthy eating, parents have a lower awareness of it than the child, indicating that parents are underestimating the impact such exposure is having on the child. Children are also less likely to tell their parents about more sensitive or embarrassing behaviour – like sexual content, making it almost impossible for parents to manage.
The Online Safety Issues Survey, conducted in 2023, found that 76% of parents of children aged 14 – 17 think the government should be “more involved in preventing and responding to online hate speech”.
Psychologist Dr Erica Komisar, a member of the Advisory Committee of The Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC), has written extensively about the horrifying effect of social media on teenage girls, as their adolescent brains are “particularly susceptible to … harsh criticism and the increased demand for perfection on social media” and that “social media dampens the self-esteem and body image of teenagers.” Her advice? Dr Komisar recommends “that parents not allow social media until at least middle adolescence, or ages 14 to 18, and only allow it in a limited way from the beginning … so the longer you can delay it the better.”
This is reiterated by The Butterfly Foundation, a national charity that focusses on people with eating disorders. They submitted data to a recent Joint Select Senate Committee that showed “… TikTok's algorithm targeted people who had a diagnosed eating disorder with:
2.3 times more appearance-related videos;
4.2 times more diet-related videos; and
more than 40 times more eating disorder-related videos.”
The algorithms target vulnerabilities and prey on them, to keep the user scrolling on the platform.
According to a paper published in the American Academy of Pediatrics journal, it has been established that once mental irregularity occurs during childhood, there are long-term effects that extend into adulthood. Anxiety, depression, or trauma-related disorders in childhood increase the risk of developing chronic mental health conditions like major depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or substance use disorders. Mental health struggles in childhood are linked to chronic illnesses in adulthood, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and immune dysfunction, as well as interfering with academic achievement, leading to lower educational attainment.
Sadly, this develops into a circularity, as adults with unresolved mental health challenges may struggle to provide a stable environment for their own children, perpetuating cycles of adversity and poor mental health. And this is why it cannot be assumed that parents are equipped to provide appropriate guidance to their children.
In a perfect world, parents would be the ideal supervisors of their children's exposure to harmful material online. But it's not a perfect world.
With adolescents reportedly pressuring their parents to allow unrestricted access to social media, the Australian Parents Council has strongly supported increasing the minimum age for access to social media to 18, as they consider children “lack the developmental maturity to navigate the complexities and risks posed”.
This sentiment is echoed by other associations, including the Daniel Morcombe Foundation, and the Eating Disorder Families Australia (EDFA), on the grounds that parents are not equipped to manage their children’s access, or put in place any protections that may be available on the platforms themselves. At a public hearing of the Joint Select Committee on Social Media, EDFA’s executive director, Jane Rowan said: “Parents feel overwhelmed and powerless against the influence of the social media giants. They are no match for the advanced algorithms and targeted messages meant to reach their children, who have not yet developed the maturity and skills necessary to navigate this online world.”
Besides, many parents are caught in the time trap, and simply don’t have the time between working and running the household to be aware of their offspring’s social media habits.
That's why there was bipartisan support for legislation to ban social media for minors aged under 16. This ban extends only to social media platforms, not emails, Google search or YouTube, all of which are used for learning.
Such a ban is being pioneered in Florida, USA, where conservative Republican Governor Ron Di Santos has passed law to ban social media for minors up to 14 years old, with those aged 14 and 15 allowed access with parental consent.
The contentious question is about the methodology of verifying the age of a person setting up a new account. There has been much speculation that age verification would require all of us to submit our ID to the platform – of course, children do not have ID like a driver's licence – and that this is the first step down the slippery slope to digital ID. Social media companies’ preference is that age verification be anonymous, to maintain privacy of their users. They recommend a third-party supplier, like the app store or operating system, as it is at arm’s length yet with established links to the platform, and therefore effective. Thankfully, new technology being developed will not require certificates or licences, rather facial recognition powers by AI should soon be able to assess age.
Of course this is not a perfect solution, and wilful social media aspirants will undoubtedly navigate a pathway to beat the system. However, there will be far fewer of their social network online with whom to trade barbs or cross reference harmful content. While it won't catch 100% of users aged under 16, it will prevent the majority from accessing these addictive platforms. And, importantly, it will empower parents to say “No” to their children's demands for access.
Caroline Inge is a Director of the Menzies Research Centre and an entrepreneur based in Melbourne.