The Australian government recently that . Prime Minister Anthony Albanese hailed the legislation for putting — for protecting youth from online harms.
Australia is to pass a nationwide ban of social media for teens, set to . But other measures have been enacted or considered here in Canada and elsewhere.
In the United States, it will be to have social media accounts starting Jan. 1, 2025.
Beginning in 2024, Québec began . This fall, with the start of the 2024–2025 academic year, also began . This follows a lawsuit filed by against social media companies for disrupting youth learning.
Québec is reportedly — — that would limit social media use for teens under 16. Provincial governments recognize that social media and cellphones can be problematic for youth, and they’re not waiting on the federal government to take action.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently announced that the proposed , originally , will be . The idea is to pass the part of the to address , image-based sexual abuse, revenge porn and other forms of online sexual violence.
Since the Online Harms Act is still being debated, MPs in Canada may look to other countries, like Australia, for guidance on protecting youth from these online harms.
Youth and online harms
Some people in Canada and see it as , including . This idea has received a lot of traction in public discourse too, including with the book that argues social media should be .
Many of us may recall the stories of , and more recently who died by suicide after being cyberbullied and sextorted.
Some studies have shown that social media use is related to . Bans or regulations raise important questions about how we, as a society, should respond to social media use among youth and deal with online harms.
Challenges with bans
We are a who study technology-facilitated sexual violence among youth aged 13–18 in Canada. We have conducted 26 focus groups with 149 youth from across the country, and launched a nationally representative survey of around 1,000 youth to learn about their experiences with online harms, what they know about the law and which resources work — and which ones don’t.
show that youth experience a range of harms as they use digital platforms and social media. We also found that algorithms are fueling harms. Youth have emphasized they want tailored supports and resources to help them have safe, healthy and enjoyable experiences with technology.
A full ban of social media is not realistic, in part because . Some ideas are to . Another idea is to for age verification.
However a ban is implemented, it will almost certainly gather more user data, which raises questions about . These measures may also drive youth towards other platforms that are less regulated, such as on the dark web. This could actually make it harder to protect youth from online harms.
. For example, abstinence-based interventions don’t work when it comes to . It is unlikely that an abstinence-based approach would work with .
Furthermore, technology is increasingly integrated into our daily lives, and youth need to be taught about healthy and responsible online interactions.
Youth are learning how to become . Kicking the problem down the road until they’re 16 or older will postpone the consequences, not solve them. This could .
A ban also frees social media companies, governments from any accountability. Rather than meaningfully addressing the harmful content and their impacts, a ban removes any and all responsibility and whose job it is to protect youth.
Holistic interventions
Technology companies need to , rather than prioritizing their profits and putting child safety and health second. , and a ban does nothing to remove harmful content or resolve its negative impacts.
Rather than bans, we suggest that emphasize digital citizenship and youth rights and responsibilities so people of all ages learn how to have safe and healthy interactions with technology. This requires a consolidated effort across various sectors of society, , and, importantly, both tech companies and government agencies.
While there are about how to , we need to act now.
Rather than resorting to blanket bans, we should prioritize comprehensive societal changes that address the root causes of these harms. By doing so, we can promote youth safety and help our communities confront online harms.
Christopher Dietzel receives funding from Le Fonds de recherche du Québec – Société et culture (FRQSC).
Kaitlynn Mendes receives funding from SSHRC and the Canada Research Chairs Program.
