A rare opportunity to safeguard children

In an interview with this newspaper, Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, accepts that his company has a “responsibility” for the content published on its platform. The obvious follow-up question is: how much responsibility? Mr Mosseri tells us that he supports a statutory duty of care “as a concept”, which is a cautious but significant breakthrough. Now the Government must present to Parliament a white paper on social media that doesn’t just rely on goodwill and promises but that delivers the kind of tough, comprehensive regulation that governs every other aspect of our economy.

This is not 1995. The internet is not still a novelty, reliant on creaky dial-ups and beyond the reach of most homes. It’s now an integral part of everyday activity, and so needs to be treated as something more serious than a “lifestyle issue” moderated by judicious parenting.

Yet that is where Britain still largely finds itself. Yesterday, the four chief medical examiners advised parents to ban phones from the dinner table and bedrooms, which is perfectly sensible but is still classic “sticking plaster” stuff. The internet is now everywhere and inescapable: schools even use apps to set homework. Filters can be beaten; identities can often be faked to get accounts; children can use devices outside the home to look at damaging material. Parents simply cannot police their children’s internet use 24/7, as was shown by the tragic case of Molly Russell, who took her own life after viewing harmful material on Instagram.

Social media companies will argue – and there is some evidence for this view – that they can provide networks of support to those who need them and flag up worrying behaviour. But a recent parliamentary report provided a grave list of online content issues in a country that, according to OECD figures, has rates of “extreme internet use” beaten only by Chile. The problems include anxiety about body image, alcohol advertising, pornography, bullying and grooming – and all at a sensitive moment for public health.

In 1997, hospital admissions for girls who had self-harmed stood at 7,327; by 2017 the figure had risen to 13,463. There is an argument raging about correlation, but what’s indisputable is that images of self-harm are more available and accessible, as demonstrated by the Russell case. Furthermore, Professor Louis Appleby, who heads the Government’s advisory group on suicide, has stated that social media companies risk “normalising” self-harm. Instagram, thankfully, has announced that it will ban graphic images of self-harm.

The conclusion is inescapable: it is time not just to start regulating access to social media but holding platforms fully accountable for what they publish.

Why has it taken so long? Politicians are frightened of being seen to criticise something brand new and shiny, and social media undoubtedly enjoys its reach because it’s so user-friendly and popular.

Demands for regulation are not borne of technophobia. This newspaper knows perfectly well that Twitter, Facebook and the rest have transformed lives and businesses, and brought political elites closer to the people (there’s a good case for saying that without Twitter, Donald Trump wouldn’t be president).

But just because the invention of the car democratised travel, it doesn’t mean manufacturers should be exempt from fitting seat belts, and likewise this idea that social media is a golden goose that mustn’t be cooked is absurd.

As is the notion that the internet is beyond anyone’s control, like some force of nature. Regulation exists and is intensifying, from France’s benign ban on smartphones in schools to reports in Russian media that Google has started to remove certain entries in search results in compliance with demands from Moscow.

In other words, tools are available to nation states to regulate this industry, as demonstrated by Labour’s endorsement of the Telegraph’s campaign for a statutory duty of care. Tom Watson, the party’s deputy leader, has proposed a new regulator with the power to fine offenders at least as much as the maximum of four per cent of annual global turnover, the level currently in place for data protection laws. Prof Dame Sally Davies, England’s chief medical officer, has also called for a new code of conduct.

That leaves the ball in the Government’s court. Theresa May has often spoken of “taking back control”, of being on the side of hard-pressed families struggling against impersonal forces. Well, here is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to foster a culture that properly safeguards children. The evidence that demands action is strong; Mr Mosseri has said he is open to dialogue. It’s time to get on with it.

It is time to regulate access to social media and hold platforms accountable for what they publish