Social Problem: Teens on social media and self-harm due to bullying

1. 85

   tsmogposted 2 months ago

   Instagram announced on Sept. 17th their new Teen Accounts. Instagram is owned by Meta also owners of Facebook. Beginning that day and over the next 60 days all teens under 16 will automatically revert to that. New users under 16 can only use that type of account. And . . .
   
   "Instagram on Tuesday unveiled a round of changes that will make the accounts of millions of teenagers private, enhance parental supervision and set messaging restrictions as the default in an effort to shield kids from harm.
   
   Meta said users under 16 will now need a parent’s approval to change the restricted settings, dubbed “Teen Accounts,” which filter out offensive words and limit who can contact them.
   
   “It’s addressing the same three concerns we’re hearing from parents around unwanted contact, inappropriate contact and time spent,” said Naomi Gleit, Meta’s head of product, in an interview with NPR."
   
   Instagram makes all teen accounts private, in a highly scrutinized push for child safety by NPR (Sept 17, 2024)
   https://www.npr.org/2024/09/17/g-s1-231 … ild-safety
   
   It appears Meta/Instagram is being pro-active considering Congress is seeking to pass legislation on the topic of teen safety with social media.
   
   "Meta’s push comes as Congress dithers on passing the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, a bill that would require social media companies to do more to prevent bullying, sexual exploitation and the spread of harmful content about eating disorders and substance abuse.
   
   The measure passed in the Senate, but hit a snag in the House over concerns the regulation would infringe on the free speech of young people, although the effort has been championed by child safety advocates.
   
   If it passes, KOSA would be the first new Congressional legislation to protect kids online since the 1990s. Meta has opposed parts of the bill."
   
   Some ask 'why' while through news reporting and word-of-mouth it is common knowledge I would suspect there is online bullying for teens and under. I know I have heard of it and really don't know that many parents who would know.
   
   One study published at the National Library of Medicine may offer some insight. The standouts are:
   
   The role of online social networking on deliberate self-harm and suicidality in adolescents: A systematized review of literature
   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6278213/
   
   "Social media use by minors has significantly increased and has been linked to depression and suicidality. Simultaneously, age-adjusted suicide rates have steadily increased over the past decade in the United States with suicide being the second most common cause of death in youth. Hence, the increase in suicide rate parallels the simultaneous increase in social media use. In addition, the rate of nonsuicidal self-injury ranges between 14% and 21% among young people. Evidence suggests that self-harming youth is more active on online social networks than youth who do not engage in self-harm behavior."
   
   Question: Does the rule of correlation does not mean causation apply? I haven't thoroughly read the study so won't speculate. I suggest skim to the end and read the discussion and conclusion to form a view
   
   Following is a Wikipedia article on the topic Social media and suicide
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_and_suicide
   
   Within it states, "cyber-bullying increases suicidal thoughts by 14.5 percent and suicide attempts by 8.7 percent. Particularly alarming is the fact that children and young people under 25 who are victims of cyberbullying are more than twice as likely to self-harm and engage in suicidal behavior."
   
   To get some quick stats the following is from Pew Research
   Teens and social media: Key findings from Pew Research Center surveys (Apr 24, 2023) There are 11 key points shared with graphics. Worth a peek just to understand teens today. I know I learned something while reflected on the kids walking by my home to and back from school looking at their phones instead of where they are going. hmmm . . .
   https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … r-surveys/
   
   Is it much to do about nothing?
   
   Do you favor more controls on teen social media use?
   
   What age should be the break point? Should it be 16 as Instagram is going to use?
   
   What about 'Free Speech' with teens? Expand on your ideas? For instance is back talking one's parents free speech? What about speaking up in class without permission? Should you be sent to the principal's office for that as punishment?
   
   Thoughts, criticisms, accolades, and commentary?

   replyreport
   1. 91

      Nathanvilleposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      It’s not just America, it’s also Europe:  children self-harming and committing suicide due to on-line bullying has been a particular big problem in the UK – And in response, both the EU & UK have already passed similar laws to the proposed American Legislation that you mention e.g. ‘The Digital Services Act 2022’ in the EU and the ‘Online Safety Act 2023’ in the UK.
      
      So I don’t think it’s just a case of “Meta/Instagram is being pro-active considering Congress is seeking to pass legislation on the topic of teen safety with social media”, most social media platforms, except ‘X’, are already in the progress of taking action to comply with EU & UK laws anyway.
      
      One difference I note is that while Instagram’s new Teen Accounts will apply to all teens under the age of 16; under the UK ‘Safety Online’ Legislation the legal age is 13 for restrictions to apply on the accounts to protect children from harm, and 18 for porn respectively.  Looking at the EU’s legislation they’ve specified their age restrictions as 16 & 18 respectively.
      
      In answer to your questions:
      
      #1 Q:  Is it much to do about nothing?
      
      A:  No, it is a serious matter because of the high level of self-harm and suicides in the UK due to on-line bullying.
      
      #2 Q:  Do you favor more controls on teen social media use?
      
      A:  Most defiantly.
      
      #3 Q:  What age should be the break point? Should it be 16 as Instagram is going to use?
      
      A:  16 seems a reasonable age.
      
      #4 Q:  What about 'Free Speech' with teens? Expand on your ideas?…
      
      A:  From a Brit’s perspective:
      
      Back talking one’s parents is free speech; the question arises on whether it’s rude, irrespective etc.  I guess it depends on the manner in which back talk is done, and the relationship between the parents and child e.g. is it a good stable relationship, or is it a strained one?
      
      Speaking up in class without permission is free speech; the question arises on the manner and frequency in which it’s done, and the relationship between teacher and pupils e.g. does the teacher encourage free interaction, or expect pupils to put up their hands – The odd occasion comment said in a good mannered way isn’t going to upset anyone, but frequent rude remarks would.
      
      I don’t see the restrictions infringing free speech; the children are still free to talk about anything they want, so long as they don’t use hate speech (which harms others); and the restrictions places the legal onus on the social media platforms themselves to protect the interest of children by being quick and efficient in taking down illegal content that can do harm.
      
      2019 - UK Parliament seizes Facebook documents:  https://youtu.be/veinOAjtzdI
      
      2018 - Zuckerberg faces EU Parliament grilling: https://youtu.be/siDnZGlsqT0

      replyreport
      1. 85

         tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         Thanks for commenting, Arthur. Yes, I think more than feel online bullying with adolescents is a challenge. It seems the UK and EU has already addressed it, however I question enforcing it as the social media world is vast. To monitor it enters right to privacy. So, there is a dance with freedom of speech and right to privacy as I see it. I haven't looked deep into right to privacy laws, yet.
         
         Seeing your reply I went on a little journey looking into adults posing as teens on social media sites. One article is next that is interesting while it also addresses bullying.
         
         Warning Labels on Social Media Should Be Applauded by Psychology Today (Sept 17, 2024 so is a very recent article)
         Personal Perspective: The Surgeon General understands the threat of social media to our children.
         https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog … -applauded
         
         Topic covered are:
         
         ** The Surgeon General’s call to action is appropriate and welcome
         **The consequences of cyberbullying, harassment, and sextortion are tragic
         ** Parents are fighting the behemoth of social media addiction on their own
         ** Let’s stop the hand-wringing and demand change
         
         "To date, the FBI has investigated 13,000 reports of “sextortion” on social media platforms–likely just a small portion of the actual number of cases, the New York Times reports. In this fast-growing crime, adults posing as teens target teens on social media, flirting with them and encouraging them to share nude selfies. If they do, the criminals then threaten to share the photos with the teens’ friends and family unless they pay up–often, many thousands of dollars. At least twenty boys targeted for sextortion have committed suicide in direct relation to this crime."

         replyreport
         1. 91

            Nathanvilleposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            In spite of the social media world being so vast, enforcing it isn’t as difficult as one would imagine in that these days the Authorities hold the social media platforms and their CEO’s personally responsible.
            
            Under the UK’s Safety Online Act 2023, the maximum penalty for social media platforms not enforcing the laws themselves is 10% of their global profit; and as a last resort, banning that social media platform from operating in the country, just like Brazil did with Elon Musk’s ‘X’ a few weeks ago.
            
            Historically, European countries have a good track record of successfully prosecuting big tech internet companies like Google and Microsoft, and social media platforms like Facebook.
            
            The top 10 fines of Social Media platforms to-date that have been prosecuted by European countries for infringing European laws are:-
            
            1.    Facebook fined $1.3 billion by the EU in 2023.
            2.    Amazon fined $780.9 million by EU in 2021.
            3.    Instagram fined $442 million by the Republic of Ireland in 2022.
            4.    Facebook and Instagram fined $425 million by the Republic of Ireland in 2023.
            5.    TikToK fined $377 million by Republic of Ireland in 2023.
            6.    Facebook fined $289 by EU in 2022.
            7.    WhatsApp fined $247 million by Republic of Ireland in 2021.
            8.    Google fined $99 million by France in 2021.
            9.    Google fined a further $66 million by France also in 2021.
            10.    Facebook fined $66 million by France in 2021.
            
            There are currently lawsuits against ‘X’ by the EU & UK.
            
            Yep, sure; to monitor what is posted does require infringement of privacy by the social media platforms, and perhaps the authorities; and that is the excuse social media platforms always use when lobbying law makers during periods when new laws are being proposed.  Infringing privacy so that the social media platforms and the authorities can monitor what is being posted isn’t an infringement of ‘freedom of speech’; it doesn’t stop people from saying what they want, as long as it’s not ‘hate speech’ etc. it just means that harmful content can be stopped before it’s published, or taken down quickly.
            
            Besides, that’s exactly what YouTube has been doing in recent years, increasingly effectively (using ever improving algorithms and AI).  Having my own YouTube Channel where I regularly post my own videos, YouTube will not allow any of my videos be published until they have been fully vetted to ensure they fully comply with all current laws – It only takes a minute or two to make the checks (very fast) – and the vast majority of time I get the green tick a couple of minutes later, allowing me to publish.
            
            And having a YouTube Channel, where I regularly post videos, I’m always impressed on how comprehensive their checks are these days – The technology is there, which could easily be implemented by other social media platforms, and certainly platforms like Facebook is moving in that direction to keep within the laws.
            
            Wow – 13,000 reports of “sextortion” in the USA; on checking the data for the UK, there was 75 cases in 2023 and 89 this year so far – So it seems that perhaps America may have a more serious problem than the UK?

            replyreport
   2. 83

      GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      This should give you a chuckle Tsmog. When I thought about what my parents would say if I claimed 'Free speech rights' to backtalk to them. Whooo Weeee. Uh uh, not me.
      
      Then I thought of the comedy routines about how Black mothers could turn a slipper or shoe into a lethal weapon from across the room.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 85

         tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         Ha-ha Yup! A little story to share. When I was about 17 my mom and I were having a discussion that became somewhat heated. My dad interjected and my reply to him paraphrased was she is my mom and I can say what I want. He retorted, "She's my wife"!! That was accompanied by his US Marine glare of authority. I got the message and as you see it remains with me today.

         replyreport
2. 69

   Ken Burgessposted 2 months ago

   Interesting that bullying went from the neighborhood streets and schools to online.
   
   The damage done is likely more severe mentally, less severe physically.
   
   Online people can gang up on you quickly, it may not even be people that are challenging you, it may be AI. 
   
   You don't know who it is you are really dealing with, a child can be posing as an adult, or an adult as a child, a man as a woman, etc.
   
   You could have someone pretending to be a Democrat saying the worst things... or you can have a Democrat pretending to be a Republican saying the most atrocious things to get people to hate.
   
   We seem to be stuck... the UK has severe laws against people who post offensive things.  With mums and kids being arrested for voicing their irate opinions... I for one don't want to see the UK's overbearing tyranny brought to America.
   
   But I also don't want to see the anonymous and chaotic wild west internet we have now.
   
   X (formerly Twitter) is getting there, with Community Comments that counter false information, with suspension of accounts that are proven bots or AI accounts... there needs to be added a punishment like what we have here in the Forums.  Where banning for a set amount of days or weeks for an offense occurs.
   
   But we don't need jail time for people saying something like "Haitians in Ohio are eating the park ducks" because someone takes offense and someone decides that is "hate speech".
   
   If we go down that road, like they have in the UK, all freedom of speech becomes illegal, anything can be turned into "hate speech" and what was OK to talk about last year becomes jail-time worthy tomorrow.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Understood, though a little wandering from the topic, yet applicable in the big picture. As the information provided in the OP as well as Arthur's contribution teen or younger self harm and suicides/suicidal ideation is on a rise and that is concerning to me.
      
      "According to a study conducted by Common Sense Media, nearly half of children in the US receive their first smartphone by the age of 10 years old and over 90% of children own one at the age of 14. However, this does not necessarily mean that 10 is the appropriate age for a smartphone."
      
      I  did not have kids, you did. So, you have intimate experience with the psychological and sociological development of children. I am sure it varies by parent/family too. I can only be an observer supplemented by information obtained someway or somehow.
      
      I am not familiar enough about established sites specifically designed for the youth. Just a skim at the next link proves my ignorance. I ask, how many parents know them or what ones the child is on. How about parental controls for that 10 year old or older. Do schools have websites that students use and there are abuses? I don't know. And, how easy is it to get on an 'adult' social media platform? What about nefarious adults impersonating as a youth on any website?
      
      Google landing page for 'Teen websites'. The first thing appearing in that serp lists 20 teen sites. Wow! And, here I was thinking we adults have less than that many, right? Just speculating.
      
      https://www.google.com/search?client=fi … n+websites

      replyreport
   2. 91

      Nathanvilleposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      In your last paragraph, where you say “If we go down that road, like they have in the UK, all freedom of speech becomes illegal,…” is gross disinformation…..” it is untrue to say “all freedom of speech become illegal” in the UK.
      
      In the UK and the EU, our freedom of speech is protected by Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, signed by all European countries in Rome, Italy in 1950:  And the Supreme Court for infringements of Human Rights is the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.  N.B. The European Court of Human Rights is NOT part of the EU and should not be confused with the EU's European Court - and therefore, in spite of BREXIT, the UK still comes under the authority of the European Court of Human Rights.
      
      Under EU & UK laws (Article 10) everyone has the freedom of speech, for as long as it doesn’t impact on other people negatively.  Under USA laws, everyone has the freedom of speech, regardless to whether it impacts on other people negatively.
      
      Under Article 10:
      
      1.    Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
      
      2.    The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society.
      
      Our Human Rights Act explained in 2 minutes:  https://youtu.be/BOc-fpC1bak

      replyreport