Is it simply a matter of the wrong vocabulary? Legislative vocabulary, to be precise. If Parliament banned social media tomorrow, would a child stop socialising online? Or would those conversations simply migrate elsewhere, to messaging apps, gaming platforms and other digital spaces that no longer fit the legal definition of “social media”?
When governments first began proposing bans and age restrictions on social media for children, the target appeared obvious. Platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and Facebook quickly became the focus of concerns over deteriorating mental health, cyberbullying, online predators and deliberately addictive design.
Yet as more countries introduce debate restrictions, a more fundamental question is emerging: what exactly counts as social media?
