By John Q. Hosedrinker 
France’s National Assembly recently approved a bill to ban children under 15 from social media, addressing growing concerns regarding online bullying and mental health risks. The legislation, which reflects rising public anxiety over social media’s impact on minors, would require platforms to implement age-verification measures to block access for young teenagers. This move, mirroring Australia’s approach, aims to set clear boundaries and potentially be in place by the next academic year, with broad political and public support for curbing minors’ access to these platforms.
Read the original article here
France’s National Assembly approves banning under-15s from social media. It’s a move that’s definitely sparking a lot of thought and discussion, and for good reason. The core of it seems pretty straightforward: kids under 15 won’t be allowed to have accounts on major social media platforms. There’s a lot to unpack here, from the reasons behind it to the practicalities of making it happen, and of course, the potential consequences.
One of the biggest questions is always going to be, how do you actually *do* this? The comments suggest some intriguing ideas, particularly around the use of age verification systems. The concept of a digital certificate, where a government-backed agency confirms someone’s age without revealing their personal details to the social media platforms, is one possible approach. This kind of system, if implemented correctly, could balance privacy concerns with the need to enforce the age restriction. However, as some have pointed out, implementing a system that’s both effective and completely secure is a massive challenge.
Now, as it stands, how this is enforced, remains a large question. There are definitely concerns that it could be easily circumvented. Savvy kids might find ways around the restrictions. We see this with other restrictions like age-gated adult content. What’s more is the potential for children to stumble into even riskier corners of the internet in an effort to bypass the restrictions. It’s definitely not a perfect solution.
The driving forces behind this ban are pretty clear, at least as they’ve been expressed in the conversation. There’s a genuine concern about the impact of social media on young people. The idea is that it is a tool for misinformation, propaganda, and ultimately leading to the decay of the youth. A lot of people are concerned about the mental health of teens. There’s a growing awareness of the potential for cyberbullying, online harassment, and the negative effects of constant social comparison and the pressure to conform. Some believe that social media companies themselves have incentivized the very worst elements of society. So, while it’s easy to see the appeal of protecting children, the ban could also isolate them and create a barrier to necessary socialization.
Also, it can be a catch 22. Some people believe that kids need to learn about modern technology, but that at the same time, giving a 15-year-old free reign on social media without any prep is a recipe for disaster. This is why some advocate for more structure, like controlled classroom networks.
On the other hand, the law’s main impact will be in conversation. It creates a space for a much-needed discussion about social media. This gives parents, teachers, and children an opportunity to think about technology use. It also makes it easier to keep kids off of social media altogether, and to not give in to social pressure. This can have a huge effect, because if fewer of their friends are using social media, there’s less incentive for those teens to also go on.
Another critical point raised is about the very definition of “social media.” What exactly *is* included? Is it just the big platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook? Or does it also encompass things like messaging apps, online forums, and video-sharing sites? The scope of the ban will heavily influence how it’s perceived and how effective it is.
Another aspect that has been mentioned is that if the government moves ahead with this, then the end goal is to bring in digital ID. Some believe that this is another means of monitoring people’s online behavior. This ties into larger questions about digital privacy.
There’s also a discussion around the potential downsides. Will it, in fact, isolate at-risk youth and cut them off from support networks? Could it make it harder for teachers to identify bullying on social media? It is also noted that the ban is only a half-way measure, and that the only thing that will fully fix the problem is by holding social media companies responsible for their content.
In conclusion, this is a complex issue. The French law raises crucial questions about how we protect children in the digital age. It’s a bold move that is, without a doubt, set to spark debate, not just in France, but around the world.