Americans Won't Ban Kids from Social Media. What Can We Do Instead?

"What seems most likely: the law will not be rigidly enforced, as teen-agers and social-media companies figure out ways to circumvent the ban, but the social norm established by the law and its robust popularity among politicians and voters will lead to a significant downturn in social-media use by minors nonetheless. Not every fourteen-year-old is going to draw a moustache on their photograph or get a fake I.D.-and the law should be easier to enforce among younger kids,"

"The civil-libertarian argument against laws like the one that Australia has passed will probably win out in this country, if only because it happens to be aligned, in this case, with powerful domestic tech companies. That argument is simple, but bears repeating: we shouldn't place arbitrary age limits on who gets to express themselves in the digital town square, and we shouldn't require everyone who wants to express their opinions online to submit to an I.D. check."

Australia's new law will likely be imperfectly enforced as teenagers and social-media companies find ways to circumvent a ban, yet strong political and popular support will create a social norm that reduces minors' social-media activity. Enforcement should be easier for younger children, making it plausible that few fourteen- or fifteen-year-olds in Australia will have ever posted on social media within five years. In the United States, civil-libertarian objections and alignment with domestic tech firms make similar restrictions unlikely. The civil-libertarian position opposes arbitrary age limits and mandatory I.D. checks and emphasizes free-speech and news-access concerns.

Read at The New Yorker