Banning social media for under-16s is not the answer

It’s uncomfortable. I find myself agreeing with Nick Clegg. Nice guy Nick, he of the promise, almost 16 years ago, of compromise and tempered wise governance in the rose garden with Dave. Austerity, Nick?
Nice guy Nick with the guarantee of no university fees. That aged well. Nice Nick who moved from the cauldron of Westminster to become the frontman for Facebook in California. Until they consciously uncoupled.

Nick says he doesn’t think social media should be banned for under-16s in the UK. I don’t know what could be the motivation for Clegg, the formerly massively paid vice-president of Global Affairs with Facebook, who held a huge portfolio of stocks with parent company Meta on exit last January.

But I think he’s right. Clegg used the example last week of a young football fan not being able to find YouTube videos of Messi as one reason not to ban. It’s legitimate, if flimsy. He spoke more cogently about this a few weeks ago. 

Get the latest news and insight into how the Big Issue magazine is made by signing up for the Inside Big Issue newsletter

The government is under pressure to follow Australia in their ban on social media for under-16s. It has broad cross party support. The Tories went hard with it as a plan earlier in January. The Lib Dems have an age-rating proposal. Andy Burnham, the thwarted prince across the water, is also keen.

Peers have already voted decisively to add an amendment to the children’s wellbeing and schools bill making the ban law. Giving evidence at the Independent Commission on Community and Cohesion, Clegg conceded that social media apps are increasingly not very social. 

“It’s the TikTokification, if I could put it like that, of social media, which is very, very different to the social media that I, at least, was interested in when I moved to Silicon Valley in the autumn of 2018, which was human-generated content, and human beings using these apps to communicate with each other,” he said, warning: “I think it is becoming an increasingly automated experience, where people are increasingly receiving, in a passive way, algorithmically recommended content… content itself will increasingly be synthetic, too.”

Read more:

• How social media has changed our world
• Social media helped the far-right mobilise quickly – but it can also bring the rest of us together
• TikTok is seeking to ban climate misinformation on the app. Will it work?

But, he believes that a ban is not the answer. Younger users will find other ways to either find, or be fed, increasingly dark material, instead insisting those who own the platforms police them and make things age appropriate is the answer. Again, I think this is right. It’s a view shared by Ian Russell. Ian’s daughter Molly, just 14, took her life after viewing harmful content in November 2017. He believes a blanket ban is wrong and advocates enforcing existing legislation.

That’s a brave and even position to take, especially considering the heartbreak and trauma his family have been through. The NSPCC, an organisation who exist to help and protect children, are also wary of an all-out ban.

Not all content on social media is bad – and that is before you try to qualify exactly what is social media. YouTube, for instance, provides access to a world of useful, informative content, beyond cats, yet, if the UK followed the Australian model, it’d be banned for under-16s. 

TikTok, of course, has corrosive, nasty material. But it is also the place where a great majority of under-16s get their news. If not there, where? I’m not against them turning in great numbers to trusted, wise sources, like Big Issue. But how realistic will that be in the short term. Would it not be more realistic they head somewhere that is less policed? 

Besides all this, there are plenty of adults, scurrying down rabbit holes of hate and misinformation, keen to boost it and flock together, who could do with some of their access being limited. However, if I were to seriously advocate that, then the cries of woke censorship would rise.

One of the best things about the Australian ban, the putative French ban, and the growing push from more nations, is that it will, hopefully, terrify the owners of the big tech platforms into taking positive action. If they start to believe their model – and money – is under threat, they’ll quickly do a two-step and get on the good foot. 

I’ll DM Nick. I’m sure he’ll agree.

Paul McNamee is editor of the Big Issue. Read more of his columns here. Follow him on X.

Do you have a story to tell or opinions to share about this? Get in touch and tell us more. 

Change a vendor’s life this winter.

Buy from your local Big Issue vendor every week – and always take the magazine. It’s how vendors earn with dignity and how we fund our work to end poverty.

You can also support online with a vendor support kit or a magazine subscription. Thank you for standing with Big Issue vendors.