Mirror world: Proposal to ban access to social media reflects a lack of understanding

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and federal Minister for Communications Michelle Rowland have proposed to legislate a social media ban for young people aged under 16 years.

Albanese cited children and young people’s exposure to harmful content – specifically, content related to body image and misogyny, as a key concern to be remedied by the ban. At their press conference announcing their plans, Albanese said:

“They, like me, are worried sick about the safety of our kids online. I want Australian parents and families to know that the government has your back.”

Heading into an election year, it’s clear Albanese’s government is keen to appear strong on this topic. And, with some parent groups in support of this move, the government is hoping to be seen as “supporting parents and families” as a strategic political move.

However, for many reasons, this legislation is unlikely to prevent young people’s exposure to harmful misogyny.

Broadly, there’s a lack of consensus on whether restrictions on social media use have a positive effect on young people’s wellbeing.

Social research has for well over a decade pointed to enormous benefits of social media for young people’s identity formation, as well as their scope to build community. This has been especially important for marginalised young people, such as young refugees and/or those in the queer community.

In terms of the latter, the connections made plausible via social media have been argued to be a lifeline, including for those young people under 16.

Additionally, age-assurance technologies are associated with many issues, from privacy to ineffectiveness, so there are concerns about the practicalities of their implementation.

More pressing for us, restricting access to social media out of concern for exposure to misogynistic ideas reflects a narrow understanding of how misogyny, sexism and male supremacy is grounded in everyday interactions, social structures and power.

Online misogyny and schools

Questions about viability aside, it’s still important to consider whether Albanese’s decision to respond to the threat of online extremist misogyny with a ban on access is an appropriate intervention.

Our research into the impact of extremist manosphere identities on boys’ behaviour in Australian schools documents that young people’s exposure to online misogyny has an impact on their behaviour towards women and girls at school.

 Research has found the creation of an account assigned male gender is enough to trigger the algorithm to produce anti-women and anti-feminist content.

Our study found that boys and young men would invoke manosphere ideas, mistruths and disinformation in classrooms, and demonstrated susceptibility to extremist ideas. For many teachers, the transformation of boys over time has been both noticeable and upsetting.

Disturbingly, we know social media algorithms serve manosphere content to boys and young men regardless of whether they seek it out. Research has found the creation of an account assigned male gender is enough to trigger the algorithm to produce anti-women and anti-feminist content.

Read more: Victorian students will get ‘anti-Tate’ lessons, but much more is needed to tackle gendered violence in schools

While this is clearly of concern, and gives reason to be critical of social media companies and their ethics, misogyny, anti-feminist ideas and gender-based violence pre-date social media platforms.

Social media platforms and their algorithms merely mirror ideas and attitudes towards women and girls that already exist, and are likely to be encountered in all settings across young people’s lives, not just online.

What else is the government doing?

The government has recently committed $3.5m to the Healthy MaTE trial, assigning funding to three existing projects working directly with boys and young men.

However, the language of the government’s press release – and, in particular, quotes from Rowlands – represent one of the key problems in this response.

Rowlands is attributed to comments outlining the government’s plan to “[create] safe, respectful and empowered communities”, and “engage with men and young boys to develop healthier and more satisfying positive relationships with their male peers”.

While these are worthy and valuable goals and outcomes, the press release failed to mention attitudes towards women as a key driver of violence against women – aligning with a common and enduring approach in conversations about young men and gendered violence that uses softened or euphemistic language.

Read more: We research online ‘misogynist radicalisation’. Here’s what parents of boys should know

It’s important to be very clear about the uncomfortable truth that young men and boys are capable of perpetuating misogyny, as well as being perpetrators of violence against women.

"Is it impossible to separate their belief in their right to degrade women from the social conditioning many young men receive from birth, and throughout their education, that informs the attitudes and beliefs that drive violence against women?"

Just this year, there have been numerous examples of misogynistic behaviour from students at private schools around the country, including ranking female classmates, and filming a gym receptionist viewing pornography that private school boys had deliberately left open on a computer at her workplace.

While it’s certainly possible to tentatively or anecdotally draw connections between these acts of sexual violence and misogyny and misogynist extremist content that boys might view online, is it impossible to separate their belief in their right to degrade women from the social conditioning many young men receive from birth, and throughout their education, that informs the attitudes and beliefs that drive violence against women?

Solutions through digital literacy

We believe that education, with a focus on specific critical skills, is a more appropriate response that takes a long-term view to support people’s relationship with social media.

This will not only enable young people to continue to be engaged in social media in ways that are meaningful to them, but will also equip them with important skills to remain critical, and to understand how platforms work, and why they see the content they do.

Digital media literacy or critical digital literacy approaches are both designed to respond to this need.

Critical digital literacy supports young people to examine ideology and power in the content they encounter, but also to understand the platforms and technologies and how they work.

Digital media literacy refers to the skills people need to “use, understand and engage” with media critically and effectively.

Read more: Post-truth politics and manosphere extremists in Australian schools

Schools are already engaged in this work in many various ways, and there’s appropriate space in the Australian curriculum to draw on.

Digital literacy forms part of the cross-curriculum capabilities included in the revised curriculum, and provides opportunities for students to hone skills in careful analysis of what they consume online.

This isn’t to say, of course, that social media companies are exempt from monitoring and moderating content that’s untruthful, unethical or likely to cause harm. They need to be held to account for the conduct they allow (and enable) on their platforms.

This curriculum approach must be coupled with education on, and prevention work, regarding the drivers of gender-based violence, and commitment to more intervention work with young people at risk.

Misogyny and violence against women are social issues, and require a social response, not a punitive one.