Is banning children from social media smart or extreme? - Asia Specific podcast - BBC World Service

And I know that if I had to deal with an onslaught. of death threats, rape threats, hate comments about how I'm fat and ugly and stupid and, you know, all these slurs and derogatory terms being thrown my way, if I had to deal with all of that, any younger than 21, I don't think I'd be here today. It may seem extreme or maybe smart, banning anyone under 16. from having an account on the biggest social media platforms.

around. Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, you name it. Australia is trying to limit how teenagers spend their time online. We think that overall, culturally, this will really change the landscape. It's hardly the only country in Asia-Pacific trying to tackle teenage addiction, though. Malaysia wants to do the same from next year, and Indonesia is also closely watching how Australia's ban plays out. So is this region leading the way or meddling too much?

I'm Mariko in Singapore and this is Asia Pacific from the BBC World Service. Twice a week we bring you Asia Pacific stories. unpacked by those who know them best. Well, today I have Katie Watson, the BBC's Australia correspondent. in Sydney, as well as Indah G. She's a 28 year old Indonesian influencer. with a flashing amazing microphone!

Should I add, it's pink and shiny? It's amazing. Thank you both for joining me on Asia Pacific. Katie, let's start with why Australia is doing this. Of course, there are various factors to speak. of - harmful content, cyber bullying and so on. And the statistics are quite astonishing, isn't it, that so many kids are on social media. and so many of them are actually exposed to that harmful content? Yeah. So when Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced Announce this.

and the legislation was passed. Actually, a year ago, he talked about the mental health of young people, but also giving parents peace. And his, kind of, motto was getting kids off the screens. and onto the footy fields or onto the netball courts, effectively giving them other things to do rather than sit on social media. So, yeah, it's about mental health. It's about not allowing kids. onto algorithms and this doom scrolling, as I said,

but it's very much trying to limit the social interaction. That's one of the parts of the legislation to try and make sure. that that kids aren't, aren't influenced by these algorithms. and affected as a result. So it's it's a real push, if you like for parents, for teens against the social media platforms. Well, you and I both have young children, and I guess this is a move widely supported by parents. But at the same time, not surprisingly,

tech companies aren't very happy with this, are they? No, not at all. In fact, trying. to get comments from them is almost impossible. But meta, for example, owns the likes of Facebook and Instagram. They put out a statement a while back saying they were going. to start chucking kids off, slightly before the ban. And they said that they agree that it needs to be safe, and content needs to be age appropriate,

but they don't agree that the ban is the way forward. And YouTube has also, said that they, in fact, I can quote. They say that removing. their access removes the very parental controls and safety filters. that are built to protect kids and that it will not make kids safer online. It also says that this regulation fundamentally misunderstands. why teens come to YouTube in the first place.

So the the tech companies are certainly very forthright. I also spoke to the Communications Minister, Anika Wells, here in Australia, who's been in charge of the rollout, and she is also pretty forthright. about why the government's motivated to do this. Pretty early on when becoming the Communications Minister, some parents, bereaved parents who had lost kids to suicide, through their social media activities,

through bullying or through a series of events, I'm walking to a room to be introduced to them. And a guy named Whipper said, 'Anika, this is Rob'. Rob was standing there in a suit. He was holding a pink urn. And he said "And this is Liv". And I just felt the oxygen suck out. of my body as the very real impact of what is happening. stood so politely and respectfully in front of me, asking me to act. So in the face of that and countless other stories like that.

I am, I am firm and unintimidated by those companies continuing to act. the way that they have chosen to act for so long. And Indah, Australia isn't alone. in wanting to ban social media access for young people. Malaysia has proposed to introduce something very similar from next year. Indonesia is also considering setting a minimum age for social media users. As an influencer who has been using social media since you were 11,

what was your reaction when you first heard about. Australia's and other government's announcement? So when I first heard about Australia's proposal, I mean, I think. a lot of people, the immediate gut reaction is to be on board with it. And that might depend on the age demographic of who you ask. I've talked to some of my friends who are currently. still in their, like 21, 20, 19.

And there are various perspectives, but I think there is also this over-demonization of social media. that we are currently seeing. So I think right now there's a lot of movement, especially from the older generation, to restrict it. Where I personally stand on this is, I think that banning social media, imposing an age restriction on it, I think is a good move. I'm not entirely against it.

I think what would be fun is if we start to debate the age. of it because, um, correct me if I'm wrong, but in Australia the age is 16 years old. I think there's room to debate whether or not 16 is, You know, I think it's a little bit too much. I honestly, my personal opinion, I feel like 14 or 15 is fine. But my most important point, and I really need to stress this, being on this platform is. that if governments like Australia, Indonesia, which you know right now,

like the government is drafting regulations aimed. at restricting social media for those under 16 years old, copying Australia's age 16 as well. I think if you just stop at restriction in the long run, it's going to create unintended, negative consequences. The more that we restrict, the more that people are going to rebel. You've been an influencer for quite a while.

I think I watched one of your, I think, birthday episodes. when you were talking about the impact of being an influencer, you know, having to upload every day, every second day, on your mental health. Can you just tell us about what's been your experience. from all these exposure to social media? Right. Well, I would consider myself lucky that. by the time that I became, I don't like using this word, but like "famous" was when I was definitely.

past 23 because that's when I graduated. I was about 24, 25, 25 for sure was when. I started making a name for myself when people started recognizing me. I gained a large enough following online. And I consider myself lucky because I now have the experience. of being a public figure online. And I know that. if I had to deal with an onslaught of death threats, rape threats,

hate comments about how I'm fat and ugly and stupid and, you know, all these slurs and derogatory terms being thrown my way, trending on Twitter and reading all of these comments of, you know, mostly not nice comments of what people think about me. and what I have to say and what I have to offer. If I had to deal with all of that, any younger than 21, I think, I don't think I'd be here today.

That would have been really difficult, wouldn't it? And I think, you know, even even at your age, I'm sure. receiving those hateful comments isn't pleasant at all. And it could take a toll on your mental health as well. Katie, it's interesting that you know someone much younger than us, like Indah, thinks that this ban is not a bad idea. You've also been speaking to teens in Australia, haven't you? What was their reaction to their government's announcement?

Yeah, I've been speaking to teens across the country. in the last few weeks, and I think it's a mixed bag. So yes, there are lots of teens, who are not too happy about it. I have spoken to quite a lot of teens who are not on social media. I spoke to one guy who came off Snapchat. because he couldn't face having to do these streaks. and having to constantly be updating and being online. So he, you know, came off by his own, voluntarily. There are people who I've spoken to saying it's patronising.

I can get a job, I can open a bank account. Like, why should somebody have control over me? So there's a real, mixture of responses. So let's have a little listen to a few more of those opinions. Yeah, I do think it's a good idea, because there's lots of, like, chance for cyber bullying and. people being unkind to happen online. And also, I think another reason for the ban is. that people are worried about, like comparing themselves to others.

and like having low self esteem. I'm against it. But I get what they're trying to do, but I don't think they're going about it the right way. Like kids are going to find a way to get around it. and are going to still access social media, even with a ban in place. That was a very interesting point that she made, wasn't it? Because I think my first reaction, Katie, as a parent of digital native children, is that they're going to find a way to somehow get back on social media.

So I guess the question is, how is the government going to make sure. that these companies, these tech giants, enforce this ban. and make sure that those children don't sign up. or remove their accounts from their platforms? Yeah. So the whole kind of central part. of this legislation is the onus is on companies. So the companies have to make sure that kids are not on, or not creating any accounts, and not on it. So they've had a year to work out kind of age assurance. So that could be facial recognition, uploading.

options for uploading ID, all sorts of things that they're working out. And it's for the company to choose the software. and the age assurance, kind of method that suits them. that they think will be most reliable if they fail to do so. And they're found, you know, lots of under 16 are on their platforms, then there's a fine of up to about 50 million AUD. That's about 32, 33 million USD. So people have pointed out that that is also, you know,

the sort of money that the likes of Meta make in a couple of hours. So how much of a deterrent will it be? But I think the government's approach is most people or most parents. will be protected by this. There will be flaws. It's not perfect, but it's a start and it's better than nothing. You know, but at the same time, there will be parents. who might think, you know what? I'm going to let my kids on. And that could be for various reasons, you know, it could be for.

LGBTQ+ kids who feel that an online community, that's been mentioned a lot when we speak to people. that there are people who find their communities online, neurodiverse kids. I was talking to an autistic organisation. You know, people really find their tribe online. and you're going to have by having this blanket ban, you're going to find a lot of these kind of minorities might lose out. Yeah. It's an interesting point that Katie made. about those marginalised youth especially.

Indah you started using social media at the age of 11. I'm sure there was a reason why you chose to do so. I mean, I guess, you know, growing up, having that kind of online community, it can actually be a positive thing. despite all the flaws that we've been talking about of social media. Yes. For sure. Yes. There's a lot of horrible things that can come out of social media. There's a lot of a lot of harm that can be done on the platform. But social media, at the end of the day, is a tool. Now, whether or not you use it for good or for bad, that is your choice, right?

We would be much better off if the government would invest in. in a curriculum that can educate us on how to make choices that can lead. to good outcomes using the tool of social media, rather than to opt. for a more repressive approach, which is to just, like, ban access. to social media entirely and like, having an age cut off. And I speak as somebody who, again, I'm 97, I am a digital native. I've been on social media. I started off on Facebook since the age of 11, and there was a lot of.

I would say though ,sorry not to interrupt, but I would say that the government here is doing education. So it's not that they're doing one or the other. Education, and it comes up time and time again. The fact is, is. there's not enough education or that that education is not getting to people. And I think that's the thing. It's that kind of level of how much protection do you give, do you put on it? Because even if they are educating, maybe parents are not good enough at protecting their kids. And I think this comes up as well, is parents need to be educated.

Parents need to understand what on earth their kids are going on to and, and being more engaged with it, because otherwise it's just kind of, as you said, it's that demonization, like 'screen time bad'. That's a massive generalization. There's loads of good things that come. from screen time. And I mean, this ban also does carry on, It does allow for educational platforms. Messaging is still part of it. Gaming is not targeted either, which is massively controversial. But yeah, I think it's about educating, making sure.

that there's a lot of education as well as that's the government's, certainly the government's approach, but plenty of people don't think. there's enough money put into the education side. Right. And my apologies, because I'm speaking. from the perspective of somebody situated here in Indonesia, where I know for a fact that there is zero education on digital literacy. This is something that I actually recently talked about, with - Indonesians will be familiar with this name, Angela Tanoesoedibjo. She came on over to my show and we were speaking precisely about this. And she brought up a really good point about how, so, we have PPKn here.

in the Indonesian curriculum. So it's basically, how would you say it in English? It's more like how to how to be a good citizen. Like, that's it's a class that's part of our curriculum here. So, you know, she was speaking about reforming the curriculum. to also incorporate the digital literacy. in order to equip the younger generation on how to navigate. increasingly digitized, and digitally connected world.

And back again to my my previous point about how, yes, you know, let's not overly demonize social media. because I as a digital native, I grew up on social media. And for all the bad that has, of course come out of it, yes, there was a lot of bad that came out of early, untethered, unsupervised access, me being on the internet 24-7. But there's also a lot of good. I wouldn't be the person that I am today.

I wouldn't even be a political influencer and a political commentator. if it weren't for how social media has allowed me to be exposed. to the world, to see the world from the comforts of my my living room. and the communities that I have been able to form online, the people that I have been able to meet, like there's so many beautiful things that can come out of social media. I guess it's been a very it's been a very steep learning curve for everyone, you know, not just parents, governments and teens.

You know, I feel like I've been kind of lucky. that my kids, my eldest kid is 11. So, you know, I kind of heard about all this teenage addiction. by the time she is reaching this age when she wants a smartphone. and I'm like, no, you're only going to get a flip phone. You're not going to access social media until you know you're 15 or 16. Whereas, you know, governments are also learning. and you know, how to educate young people as well. But, Katy, you talked about that. online gaming not being part of this ban.

Also, I thought it was interesting that AI chatbots, they're not banned. either when recently they made news headlines. for possibly suggesting, suicidal thoughts. to teens who were obviously very desperate using their service. So yeah, there's flaws in this. And I've spoken to the Communications Minister about it. And and I think the crux of it is it's about the social interaction. So that has to be the main point of the platforms right now.

But then, you know, critics will say there's a fundamental misunderstanding of what these platforms are like. I think the government's idea is if you remove the games, would those kids, would they be on platforms? Perhaps not, but the point is, is when they're playing those games, they are messaging. They are, they are very much socially interacting. And that is a massive flaw. So the government said it's dynamic, it's not perfect, but I think they've got a lot of, you know, they've got to answer.

to why on earth some of these platforms that are. So, so common among young people, why are they not being being targeted when there are so many parents. who feel this legislation was there to give them peace? But there are plenty of them who are not at peace with games not included. And I guess a lot of governments, not just in Asia Pacific, but around the world, they'll really be closely watching. how this ban by the Australian government is going to go ahead. and possibly follow suit, won't they? Right?

I mean, Australia certainly is becoming the trendsetter when it comes to this. Where I stand on all of this is, again, I feel like this policy, if we were to just stop. at this policy of putting an age limit on social media accounts, and it's unaccompanied by all of the other things that we mentioned before, it's we're just playing whack-a-mole policy making here. If you want to talk about bullying. It's education again!

Yeah, it's back again. Everything keeps going back to the education. It's education. But also I mean, one of the things the critics complain about is that yes. So they want to attack, they want to try and address cyberbullying. But by not allowing a child. on YouTube and having their own account, they can still watch videos, but there won't be any kind of, those algorithms that are seen as bad. could also mean that they, they'll watch something. that could then lead to something that is less appropriate to them. And as YouTube said, it could be, you know, really unsafe for kids.

and those kids might also go to other platforms that are less safe. than the big companies, that perhaps have more funds. and more resources to be able to put those protections in. But then the argument from the Communications Minister is they've had 15, 20 years to make it safer. And only when, legislation is threatened. do they start to say, 'we'll do this and that and the other'. So yeah, it's really, really hard one. I think it's fair to say that not just this part of the world, but the entire world will be watching how Australia's ban takes effect,

whether or not that ban can actually be enforced. We'll leave it there. Katie Watson, and Indah G, thank you so much for joining me. You've been watching Asia-Pacific from the BBC World Service. with me, Mariko in Singapore. If you have any questions or thoughts on what we covered in today's episode. or any other story from the region, please leave us a comment below. and click like and subscribe so you never miss an episode. But for now, thank you so much for watching and see you next time!