Anti-Socia Media?

This week I have been fortunate to witness the power and strength that comes from people coming together. It was an absolute joy to spend the day with so many people at the LVET conference and to follow this up by joining around 30 people to summit Gowbarrow Fell to celebrate a friend’s achievement of ‘bagging’ all 214 Wainwrights. There is so much to learn from and to reflect on – the LVET conference will be on my mind for a while as will the beauty of folk coming together. Both events were truly uplifting and energising and served to emphasise to me that when we connect with others we are stronger and we truly are more. 

But I have also seen what to me, is one of the biggest acts of victim blaming I have ever witnessed. The government announcement of a social media ban for under 16s strikes me as a dreadful case of picking the route that takes something away from the least powerful people in the situation. It feels like the equivalent of schools saying that boys are distracted by girls’ attractive legs – so they make girls wear trousers rather than dealing with the objectifying and objectional behaviour of (some) boys.  

Some might argue that this ban is a triumph of the power that comes from collective voices calling for change, and it is true that some campaigners have had a very strong influence on the development of this policy. It could also be argued that not all voices have been heard equally. It may also be the case that the risk of harm to some has outweighed the potential benefits to others.  

What is the message we are sending young people when we tell them that something is so harmful we will ban its use up to an arbitrary age but then allow it after that age – it is either harmful or it is not. For me it sums up an approach to civic life that disempowers people, removes choice and has a detrimental impact on individual resilience. How can you, on the one hand, promote the use of technology to manage your health and then on the other ban some people (based on age) from utilising technology – yes some people get into trouble using that technology but how many use it positively to find friendship groups, seek positive advice and reassurance and grow as individuals.  

Technology is not to blame, young people are not to blame but maybe the ‘bad actors’ that are in the world (and always have been) will find a way to do the bad things they do. My views is that they are the ones who should have liberties restricted. I don’t really want to get into a discussion about the rights and wrongs of the actual ban itself though I do think it raises a really important issue for Voluntary and Community organisations involved in health and wellbeing activity. 

For me the missing bit in many of the debates on TV and other media is an acknowledgement of the world we live in, where the economic orthodoxy is to allow the market free reign. A world where ‘the market’ has been seen as the solution to societal issues but is in many instances the creator of them. For example, normalisation of gambling, allowing vaping (on prescription) but banning tobacco (so not addressing nicotine addiction) and to target young people with sweet flavours. 

It is this idea of the Commercial Determinants of Health – the private sector activities that impact human wellbeing that I think is highlighted in this debate about young people and the impact of social media on their health and wellbeing. I think it is symptomatic of the world we live in that it is easier for governments to restrict individual rights rather than cut off the harms at source in a global economy dominated by continual growth, profit and (theoretical) tax income. I am sure many of us will have seen Erin Brokovitch – a film about collective action taken because a company was impacting on a whole town’s health. Yes, this is an extreme example, but how many companies have an impact on our health – from food producers and retailers to car manufacturers and shampoo manufacturers and packaging companies?  

It isn’t only social media companies that are having a negative impact on the health of young people.