Thread by @evan_greer

A few reporters asked me what I think about the latest Facebook scandals and today's hearing on Instagram and harm to kids.

First of all, I think Facebook shouldn't exist and most of its surveillance capitalist business practices should be banned, but beyond that... THREAD:

Conversations about how to best protect kids on social media need to start with the understanding that, for at least some kids and teens, access to online community can be a lifeline.

For LGBTQ+ youth with unsupportive parents, for example, the ability to seek out peers with similar experiences online could be the difference between depressing isolation and thriving within a supportive community.

Young people have also been at the forefront of social movements like #BlackLivesMatter and the youth-led climate justice movement, largely organized online. We should be fighting for a world where young ppl are safe online, but also a world where young people can be heard online

To get the right answers we need to ask the right questions:

Which problems are societal problems that social media platforms are just shining a light on?

Which problems are social media platforms actually creating?

Which of those problems are inherent to social media as a whole, versus driven by the specific business practices of companies like Instagram and YouTube, like data harvesting and algorithmic manipulation?

And, crucially––and this is the part that frankly I think the vast majority of commenters in this space are ignoring: Which societal problems are social media platforms (even the problematic ones) actually potentially addressing or mitigating?

When we propose solutions, they need to contend with this complexity, or we run the risk of enacting false solutions that fail to address the root causes of harm, or worse, policies that do more harm than good.

I think it's also crucial that we ask ourselves not just "which policies are best for kids on social media" but also "which policies governing social media and technology broadly lead to the type of world we want our kids to grow up in?"

For example, law enforcement agencies have for years falsely claimed that criminalizing or undermining end-to-end encryption will decrease online harms to children –– but even if that were true (it's not), we should weigh that against the reality that undermining ...

...encryption would almost certainly lead to human rights advocates in repressive countries being killed, and social movements for basic rights being undermined. Do we want our kid to grow up in a world where social media is heavily restricted, but so are their basic rights?

Or, put another way, if the policies that lawmakers enact purportedly to keep kids safe from online harms also kneecap the youth-led climate justice movement, are we actually helping kids or making the world that they grow up in a better place? Or are we using them as pawns?

Finally, it's important to recognize that what's good for kids on social media is also good for adults. We need strong Federal data privacy laws that protect EVERYONE, not just kids.

We need real antitrust action and policies that address inherently harmful surveillance capitalist business practices like microtargeting and algorithmic amplification that's maximized for addicting engagement.

Solutions that are based in age verification tend to come with a host of problems, including undermining online anonymity, a disaster for international human rights and free expression.

It may be convenient or enticing for lawmakers to pass legislation that they can say is protecting kids. It would be better if they would pass legislation that protects everyone, and helps build a more open, democratic, and safe world for our kids to grow up in.