Social media ban could tackle body dysmorphia, says East Midlands charity
Children under 16 will no longer be able to access platforms such as TikTok
A charity supporting young girls in the East Midlands says a social media ban could help tackle body dysmorphia amongst young people.
From early next year, children under 16 will no longer be able to access platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and Facebook.
What is the social media ban?
The Prime Minister announced the ban in response to concerns social media is unsafe, making children miserable and could cause lasting damage to their mental health.
The restrictions, set to be passed by Christmas and in place by spring next year, will leave technology firms, rather than children, liable for enforcement action if they fail to comply.
The plans are modelled on a similar ban in Australia, but the Government has aimed to learn from the mistakes of the restrictions imposed there, and has gone further with new limits aimed at preventing children from speaking to strangers while gaming online.
'Body dysmorphia and eating disorders'
Louise Adams is the CEO of Love4Life, they support girls aged 11-18 in the East Midlands: "Social media makes it easy for young people to assume that what you see on the camera is reality. Young people then fear they are not living up to expectations like the rest of the world.
"We have definitely seen young people with body dysmorphia and eating disorders which have been exasperated by social media. Influencers will tell them to eat less or moderate what they eat.
"It is really simple to assume that this is what life is meant to look like. The more young people are looking at that content the more you see it through the algorithm," she said.
What do tech firms say?
Leading tech firms spoke up against Sir Keir’s plans following the announcement, warning that a blanket ban on social media for under-16s could drive them into unregulated online spaces.
Meta, the parent company of both Facebook and Meta, said it shared the Government’s “goal of keeping teens safe online”, pointing to its development of teenage accounts which “automatically limit who can contact them and the content they see”.
But a spokesperson for the company added: “Like others, we don’t think bans will achieve this goal.
“As we’ve seen in Australia, bans risk isolating teens from online communities and information, and driving them to unregulated alternatives that lack built-in protections and parental controls.
“To be both effective and easy for parents, any restrictions must be underpinned by an age verification system on devices so people aren’t asked to hand over ID to dozens of individual services to prove their age.
“We will continue to engage with the Government and Ofcom as they work to implement this policy.”
'Less safe services'
YouTube similarly warned that the bank could push children toward “less safe services”.
A YouTube spokesperson said: “We’ve invested in expert-led, age-appropriate experiences and default protections for teens for over a decade and will continue to do so.
“YouTube is a vital resource for young people, educators and parents.
“Blanket bans push kids out of such curated, supervised, beneficial experiences and towards anonymous, less safe services.”