The British have a peculiar fondness for bans. They provide a sense of collective action and control during difficult periods, offering simple, black-and-white solutions to complex problems. However, this tendency often overlooks the crucial element of nuance, particularly when it comes to protecting young people online.
The Flawed Logic of Blanket Prohibitions
Recent unanimous backing in the House of Lords for a government-proposed ban on social media usage for under-16s has sparked significant debate. While intended to safeguard children, many experts argue this approach is fundamentally misguided. It creates what campaigners describe as "a false sense of safety" that could simply push both children and the threats they face to less regulated corners of the internet.
Ian Russell, whose daughter Molly died by suicide in 2017 after viewing harmful online content, has been a prominent voice against such "sledgehammer bans." Through the Molly Rose Foundation, established in her memory, he advocates for more sophisticated protections rather than outright prohibition. This sentiment is echoed by leading child protection organisations including the NSPCC, Parent Zone, and Childnet.
The Historical Parallels of Moral Panic
The current anxiety surrounding social media bears striking resemblance to previous moral panics. The "satanic panic" of the 1970s and the harmful anti-gay sentiment of the 1980s and 1990s, which culminated in legislation like Section 28, demonstrate how fear-driven responses can cause significant collateral damage. Today's concerns about online platforms risk repeating these patterns, potentially harming the very communities they aim to protect.
For many young people, particularly those from marginalised groups or with niche interests, social media provides essential safe harbour, community, and learning opportunities they might not find elsewhere. A blanket ban would indiscriminately remove these vital support networks.
The Critical Need for Media Literacy Education
The fundamental issue isn't social media itself, but rather our collective failure to develop proper media literacy. Just as previous generations received inadequate guidance about navigating the emerging digital landscape, today's children and adults alike lack the tools to critically engage with online content.
This educational gap has serious consequences:
- Inability to distinguish between genuine content and sophisticated scams or misinformation
- Failure to recognise unrealistic body image editing and harmful beauty standards
- Vulnerability to algorithmic manipulation by platforms prioritising engagement over wellbeing
- Difficulty identifying grooming behaviours in political, ideological, or personal contexts
Ironically, the debate around social media bans presents a perfect opportunity for parents to begin these crucial conversations with their children, developing critical thinking skills through practical discussion.
Practical Approaches to Digital Education
Rather than prohibition, experts recommend approaches similar to how we teach other essential life skills. Parents might review social media accounts and trends with their children, just as they work through the Highway Code before driving lessons. Documentaries like Embrace (2016) and Your Fat Friend (2023) provide excellent starting points for discussions about media representation and online influence.
The government's response to digital challenges has been criticised as inadequate, particularly regarding platforms that have facilitated harmful content. There's growing consensus that proper checks and balances are needed for social media usage across all age groups, alongside comprehensive education about how these platforms actually function.
Ultimately, protecting young people online requires moving beyond simplistic bans toward developing genuine media literacy. This means educating both children and adults about digital tools, recognising manipulation tactics, and understanding that online spaces, like their physical counterparts, require navigation skills rather than avoidance. The solution lies in education, not prohibition.
