Where The Wild Things Lurk (Naked City)

It’s been a talking point for weeks but on December 10 the Federal Government’s barring of the under 16s from social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat becomes a reality – or does it? As well intentioned as it might seem its effectiveness in getting kids off their phones and protecting them from bullies and predators remains to be seen.

The Government argues that a study they commissioned earlier in the year showed that 96% of kids aged 10-15 used social media, with around 70% exposed to harmful content and behaviour, some of which could be found to promote eating disorders, bullying and even suicide.

Yet is it essentially just a form of censorship when history tells us that banning any form of ‘unacceptable’ social dialogue will invariably backfire – unless you are stuck in countries like Iran and North Korea. Whether it’s spoken, written, broadcast or transmitted via phone there’s a natural resistance in the more democratic countries to be told just what you can hear and see. Amongst rebellious young teenagers that resistance is often magnified by what they see as oppressive ‘nannyism’.

Over the years numerous books have been placed on the children’s banned list or restricted from availability like libraries and schools. When Maurice Sendak’s picture book ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ first appeared in 1963 its scary monsters were considered too freaky, disturbing and psychologically damaging for young readers. It was banned in some States in America, predominantly in the South, yet years later it’s been adapted into a feature film, an opera, a video game and personally endorsed by President Obama.

Likewise, ‘The Little Red School Book’ enraged many Australians, moral crusaders and talk back jocks when it became available here in the early 70s. Written by two Danish school teachers Søren Hansen and Jesper Jensen it encouraged kids to think about sex, drugs, pornography and democracy in frank and simple terms. It was banned in a number of countries worldwide and faced the wrath of the Bjelke-Petersen regime in Queensland where it was also given the chop.

Whilst you might not consider the social media ban for under 16s as old school censorship, it does entail a denial of information and knowledge. There’s certainly validity in the argument that it protects young teenagers from predatory grooming and steers them in another direction from endless phone scrolling, but does it cut them off from much of the real world. UNICEF Australia recently made a good point when they stated:

“While it’s great that we’re talking more about improving the online world for young people, UNICEF Australia thinks that the proposed changes won’t fix the problems young people face online. Social media has a lot of good things, like education and staying in touch with friends. We think it’s more important to make social media platforms safer and to listen to young people to make sure any changes actually help. That’s why we’re including young people’s opinions when we’re talking to the government about making online spaces as safe as they can be.

Not all young teenagers are obsessed with serial Tik-Tok scrolling. Sites like Facebook and Reddit offer some interesting insights and a healthy debate into the world at large, the important issues of the day and many of the ‘adults’ who call the shots – like Donald Trump for example.

Somewhat ironically Trump is calling out the Australian Government on the new social media restrictions and standing behind the powerful lobby groups representing the various platforms. The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) has stated that the Australian social media ban for under-16s, overlooks the progress the industry had made on protecting children from harmful content and “raises serious concerns for industry about freedom of expression and information”.

On the one hand Trump endorses freedom of speech but threatens and often does sue just about anybody who dares criticize him. Yet if your Facebook feed is left leaning you would have seen numerous memes and grotesque caricatures of the orange oligarch that accuse of him of everything from sexual predatory to crimes against humanity. Has he ever had a discreet phone call to Mark Zuckerberg calling for that content to be deleted.

The social media ban, designed with all good intentions, is a bold experiment with many questions hanging over it. Just how it will be fully implemented and enforced remains to be seen as does the ability of many ‘creative’ teenagers to circumvent the restrictions. Sexual predators might look elsewhere and the hours saved on phone gazing might be replaced by even less rewarding activities. That early political awareness could be stifled if kids have to rely on mainstream media to get their feed.

A recent ABC vox pop revealed mixed opinions amongst young teenagers as to the justification and impact of the ban – some sympathetic, others annoyed that they were being dictated too unnecessarily. I pity anybody who has just turned 15 and will have to spend the next 12 months in social media purgatory before they then have to prove their bona fides and be allowed back on the various platforms.

Perhaps the last word here should go to one of the teenager interviewees who commented:

“Instead of completely banning it they’ll be back on it once they’re sixteen and doing all the same things they were before, so I think we should be educating them instead.”