Instagram ban isn’t a cure-all

MY COLUMN last week on social media generated a big postbag, with many of you agreeing that the likes of Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and Snapchat must be held to account for content on their sites that is detrimental to children’s mental health.

Now Professor Stephen Powis, national medical director of NHS England, has waded into the debate. He wants a ban on any post that could ‘cause physical or mental harm’.

Yes, we need to do something to force the tech giants to accept responsibility for content they host — and I welcome Instagram’s announcement yesterday that it will ban graphic images of selfharm. But I’m against a wider, general ban as proposed by Mr Powis. That’s a form of censorship and is unacceptable.

Adults should be able to access whatever they like as long as it’s not illegal — even if the words and images are promoting products or ideas and actions that are unhealthy or ill-advised.

We must be free to make up our own minds. But as I argued last week, when it comes to protecting children we need a minimum age limit to access social media — 16 — and effective means of age verification, which is what the Government’s chief Medical Officer, Dame Sally Davies, is advocating.

Drastic, yes, but what choice do we have when government ministers talk about regulation but fail to act, and the fat cats of Silicon Valley are dragging their feet.