‘Crapification’ of cyber children

Last month, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka announced bans on the use of social media by children due to rising concerns related to digital addiction and mental health. Other states such as Goa and Bihar may join this group. The former has formed a task force to impose restrictions, and assess the implications of a ban. Bihar has sought experts’ advice to reduce screen-time, including social media, for the children. India may opt for a national-level law, as it ruthlessly did with money-based online gaming. Social debase, addiction, and economic effects may drive the curbs on social media in the future.

Recently, the Economic Survey highlighted the growing concern over digital addiction and its impact on health, productivity, and academic performance among India’s youth. It argued for age-based access limits for social media platforms, and the introduction of restrictions on digital advertisements targeted at children. It felt that there was an urgent need to enforce age verification, and age-appropriate defaults, particularly for social media, gambling apps, auto-play features, and advertising. It recommended that simpler mobile devices may be apt for children, which may include basic phones, and education-only tablets, with pre-installed filters to reduce the exposure to harmful content.

Other nations are keen to take similar action. Australia’s under-16 ban was among the first globally, followed by Indonesia. Austria, a few provinces in Canada, Denmark, France, and Spain are considering similar measures. Even in the US, according to media reports, Utah has passed the Social Media Regulation Act in 2023 that requires age verification, and other states wish to enforce similar laws. The debates and discussions are ongoing, and the outcomes may depend on feedback from the parents, children, experts, and tech firms. In many instances, the real battles will be fought in the courts of law.

Jatin Gandhi, a senior journalist and practitioner of Trust and Safety (T&S), considers the two states’ moves in India to control the children’s unfiltered access to social media as the steps that are “definitely in the right direction.” But he adds that laws are not enough. Feedback before and after the laws, and implementation hold the key. “In Australia, where they were first rolled out, they (policy-makers) spoke with children and parents. Some parents were apprehensive that children may somehow find alternative means to access the platforms. Hence, it depends on how it (law) is rolled, how it is monitored, and how the society and homes regulate it.,” he explains.

T&S refers to the policies, practices, and teams dedicated to ensure that the digital users can trust and feel safe while engaging with online platforms and services. However, over the years, terms like ‘crapification’, ‘enshittification,’ initially coined by Cory Doctorow in 2022, or ‘platform decay,’ which refers to the process by which the two-sided platforms degrade over time, have come into vogue. Until now, the devaluation process was ignored, social media had a free run, which created havoc, with internet penetration rising fast. Such terms imply that the predictable decline in quality of platforms is inevitable, as they increasingly prioritise profits over the needs of the users.

“Initially, the platforms offer high-quality services to attract users, gradually give precedence to business customers, and eventually exploit the users and business clients to maximise short-term profits,” explains Gandhi. Thus, there are three stages in the evolution, growth, and maturity of social media. In the first stage, the platforms are perceived as valuable to the society, and empower the individual, and democratise communication. They “build value for users, build a community, and lock in that community.” In the second stage, once attention is guaranteed, the information is sold to the advertisers.

In the final stage, the platforms do not add value to either the users or businesses. They amass the profits. If the users searched for content earlier, the process is reversed as the content begins to find the users. “They (social media) target you constantly. Thus, it is dangerous to allow social media to permeate our lives, and this is why it is a good idea to first ban, then regulate, and finally ease,” says Gandhi. In effect, laws to restrict, limit, and ban are part of the evolutionary process.

Overall, the discussions in India are still in the early stages, despite the bans by the two states. Reports suggest that the central government is not interested in a blanket ban, like Karnataka, but wishes to explore ways to regulate the access to social media. Age verification tech may emerge as a potential solution to ensure compliance with restrictions. The outcomes will depend on the seriousness among the policy-makers, experts’ advice, and reactions of the tech firms. Most experts do not favour a ban, but agree on controlled entries to platforms, with guidance from the teachers, parents, as well as specialists.

According to Sambit Pal, director, journalism school at MIT, “These steps will lead to less addictive scrolling, and restrict exposure to harmful content. We need parental guidance, and free conversations about how to use social media wisely. The platforms must implement stricter age-verification systems, and ensure that content offered to underage users is appropriate and safe.” Adds Joydeep Dasgupta, founder, Media Skills Lab, “Unfettered social media access exposes children to online risks like cyberbullying, predators, and unhealthy comparisons. Parents should guide and set limits on screen time, ensuring a balance between digital learning and real-life interactions.”

Psychologists note that restricting access can reduce risks of addiction, anxiety, depression, sleep disorders, and body image issues among teenagers. Karnataka’s child development consultant, Saritha Nagaraj, highlighted mental health symptoms from unhealthy comparisons. Gandhi wants the policy-makers to consider other related issues. For example, he explains, “If you look closely, the content is owned by the platform. So, even if it is not used elsewhere, since one single case may lead them to lose credibility, they do hold a legal right.” This needs to change, either as a law, or self-imposed rules.

However, despite the growing focus on use of social media, the laws may not be enough. Indeed, they are likely to be legally challenged. Finally, the courts will decide. In the US, a few cases were resolved in favour of the parents and children in the recent past. These may propel more cases against social media and online platforms. This may lead to a chain reaction like the one against the cigarette firms in the 1980s. There may be problems to impose the bans, like age certification, apart from a backlash from the teenagers, who may protest them.

(The author has more than three decades of experience across print, TV, and digital media) ; views are personal