Why the internet is not fit for children
THIS week leading academics called for a digital environment that is ‘fit for childhood’. The ‘Digital Childhood’ report pointed out that the internet was conceived as an environment for adult users and no design concessions were made for children. The utopian vision of the internet was that all users would be equal. If all users are equal, then a child user is treated the same as an adult user and this is why the internet is not fit for children.
We all know about the convenience, connectedness, creativity, educational, efficiencies and commercial benefits of the internet. I am absolutely pro technology. I could not do my work as a cyberpsychologist without spending a substantial amount of my time online.
Good science focuses on balance, if I focus on some of the negative aspects of technology it is to bring the debate back to the balanced centre, rather than have one driven by idealism or commercialism.
My aim is to provide insight, based on what we know about human beings and how their cognitive, behavioural, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational capabilities have been exploited or compromised or changed by use of the internet. I was so concerned about the potential impact of internet use on the developing child that I decided to write a book about it. In 2013, I started working on ‘The Cyber Effect’. At the time I thought that if I published the issues with the internet and children that somehow they would be addressed. I was wrong. If anything, these problems are getting worse.
Age-appropriate use of devices that connect to the internet is critical. Children are increasingly using such devices at a younger age – 16pc of three- to four-year-olds have their own tablet, and more than 30pc of eight- to 11-yearolds now have a smartphone. Age-appropriate use of devices has its merits, however 3pc of five- to seven-year-olds and 23pc of eight- to 11-year-olds have a social media profile, despite regulations in this area that stipulate users should be 13.
How many times have you seen a young infant in a pushchair with a smartphone thrust into their hands as a ‘virtual pacifier’ or a toddler being given an iPad to calm them in a restaurant? The American Academy of Paediatrics advises that children younger than 18 months should not use screen media.
The statistics are worrying – rates of anxiety and depression in young people have increased by 70pc over the past 25 years. Young people say four of the five most used social media platforms make their feelings of anxiety worse. A 2017 report found that Instagram was “the worst for young people’s mental health”. The Royal Society for Public Health 2017 report stated that “social media may be fuelling a mental health crisis” in young people – I would agree.
Insomnia is on the rise – one in five young people wake up during the night to check messages on social media, they are three times more likely to feel constantly tired at school. Nine in 10 teenage girls say they are unhappy with their bodies, and there has been a surge in teenage girls being hospitalised for eating disorders – according to the HSE, the number has almost doubled over 10 years. In my opinion these increases are linked to use of social media, along with the availability of such sites as ‘pro-ana’ and ‘pro-mia’ (websites encouraging and glamorising anorexia and bulimia) that influence vulnerable, self-conscious teens.
Ireland has one of the highest rates of ‘sexting’ among young people in Europe. These explicit images can make young people vulnerable to cyberbullying and to ‘sextortion’. In my role as the academic adviser to Europol I was involved in a 2017 campaign addressing ‘sextortion’ and ‘webcam blackmailing’, which has skyrocketed in the past few years. Our report revealed that victims as young as seven years old are being targeted online.
When it comes to children the internet is broken. In recent weeks, Google’s YouTube platform was heavily criticised for allowing child abuse videos and violent/offensive content to stream. A BBC investigation reported that part of YouTube’s moderation system for reporting sexualised comments left on children’s videos had not been functioning properly for more than a year. Google has announced this week that it is “hiring thousands of moderators”. Let’s do the math – thousands will not work when it comes to billions of viewers.
Moderators are being used as human filters for the worst that the internet has to offer, and let’s not forget that these young moderators are also someone’s child. Who is responsible in the event of injury to their mental health as a consequence of performing this role? Will this be a matter for their employer?
We have been here before with the tobacco industry and asbestos; I wonder what the class actions of the future will look like in terms of employer liabilities, general negligence and personal injury? Are the search and social media giants making provisions for their future liabilities? Should our statutory authorities be paying attention? How do we classify these corporations? Are they broadcasters, internet providers, publishers, utilities? More importantly what are their responsibilities and liabilities to internet users?
Anxiety, depression, insomnia, eating disorders, low self-esteem, exposure to extreme content, ‘sextortion’ and predators – is this what we want for Irish children? Our Taoiseach is busy negotiating the Border implications of Brexit, but there is another frontier that urgently needs Government attention, that frontier is in the digital realm, in cyberspace and in my opinion children are actively being harmed.