"Spiegel's comments, published in The Financial Times, come as more regions are considering similar bans, which could have a devastating impact on the app, with Snapchat set to lose tens of millions of users globally if regulators follow Australia's example. Spiegel says that the teen bans represent a flawed approach, and fail to address the most significant harms of online exposure. The Australian approach, in particular, lacks comprehensive protections, he said."
"Some who support teen social media bans seem to be under the impression that these restrictions will prompt teens to go back to playing outside, riding their bikes and kicking a ball in the park. But the realities of modern interaction, especially in the post-COVID era, mean that the internet is now a critical connector, in various ways, and if kids can't engage on one app or platform, they'll just go to another one."
Teen social media bans risk massive user loss for affected platforms and may fail to reduce the most significant online harms. Laws that regulate only certain platforms create gaps that push teens toward less regulated, potentially less safe alternatives. Age-estimation technology is imperfect, complicating enforcement and compliance. The scientific evidence on net harms versus benefits of social media use for teens remains inconclusive, with many reports indicating social connection benefits. The Australian example illustrates gaps in efficacy and potential unintended consequences; compliance alone does not guarantee safety. A more effective approach centers on digital-literacy education, targeted protections for vulnerable young people, and comprehensive, platform-agnostic safeguards.
Read at www.socialmediatoday.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]