Look, I love social media. I have dear friends all over the world, and even though they are mostly too far away to hug, they are always in my pocket. From cat pictures to heartbroken wailing, they can hear and see me when I need them to. During lockdowns it kept me connected. While working from home, it keeps me sane. While travelling, those who stayed home can see what I see, know where I am, and stay in touch. It’s wonderful.
And yes, I also hate it. I hate the dark, depressing rabbit holes. I hate its desperate hunger for engagement that tracks what I watch and read and urgently throws me more of the same mindlessly tasty visual snacks, utterly heedless of its impact on my mental health, or indeed my productivity.
I hate that engagement – see also: profit – trumps all. It gives us the likes of Andrew Tate and Donald Trump. It sees influencers edging towards – and sometimes over – cliffs to get that literal money shot. It drives maddening clickbait headlines “You won’t believe what happened next!” and “This suburb has one crazy secret that the locals hate to share!”
That ever present algorithm wants me afraid, angry, helpless, greedy, and spending.
It’s no wonder the Australian Government’s decision to ban social media for kids under 16 has so much support.
There are many downsides to the ban. Kids under 16 no longer have the support of far flung people dealing with the same things – for kids experiencing life’s dramas, social media can be a lifeline: from being trans with unsupportive families to having niche interests, from being stuck in a small community where you don’t feel like you fit in to being ill and unable to leave the house.
But the big problem is that it doesn’t solve any of the problems with social media. It just kicks them down the road a little, or leaves kids finding ways around the ban (which, let’s face it, most of them will).
Social media is still toxic for folks 16 and older. But it doesn’t have to be.
We are enslaved by the algorithm.
But we don’t need to be.
What if we legislated to remove the algorithm? To switch to chronological feeds so that you only see posts from the folks you follow, in the order they were posted, and the algorithm doesn’t compete for your eyeballs? What if we say that profit does not, in fact, come first, but instead better mental health and improved social cohesion are our primary goals?
You could still search for particular topics, and share content that you find interesting, but the system would not drag you down into high engagement, angry or fearful rabbit holes. And, while we’re at it, make tech companies legally responsible for the content they publish.
The tech companies would HATE it – even more than they hate the current ban – but who cares? Our government has a responsibility to improve the health, wealth, and wellbeing of every Australian, not to enrich tech companies. Sure, it doesn’t exactly look like it, based on their policies, but they absolutely do have the power to eliminate the wholesale consumption of our souls for profit. The tech industry wants us to believe that their way is the only path to the future. It’s time for us to say No! to the tech industry and create a future of our own devising.
Banning kids under 16 from social media might make great headlines, and give the government the appearance of doing something meaningful, but it’s tokenistic at best, harmful at worst. We could have an internet that doesn’t consume us for fun and profit. We’re choosing not to. Perhaps it’s time to make a different choice.