essay on instagram should be banned

Facebook Should Be Banned Essay (Privacy Invasion, Social Effects, etc.)

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Privacy invasion, destruction of relationships, social effects, reference list.

Admittedly, social networks have become an indispensable part of human life. On the one hand, such networks as Facebook provide many great opportunities to communicate and share opinions. On the other hand, Facebook may lead to many negative outcomes. Almost unlimited access to information often becomes a great problem for personal and social life.

Thus, Facebook can have such negative effects as privacy invasion and the destruction of relationships, and it can even influence the development of society (e.g., Arab world protestors). Therefore, Facebook should be banned as it negatively affects the major aspects of human life.

Facebook is one of the most famous social networks and has more than 500 million users. Of course, this network provides lots of opportunities to communicate and make new friends. However, the tool is too imperfect.

In the first place, there were several scandals concerning the network’s creators ‘sharing’ information. Reportedly, they sold the personal information of users to certain companies. The network’s creators argued that users shared their information, so it meant the information was not confidential. Likewise, almost anyone can find some personal information and use it.

The most vulnerable category of users is teenagers, who may reveal their personal information to criminals without even understanding the potential danger. Therefore, Facebook should be banned to prevent privacy invasion and associated crimes.

Furthermore, such networks also lead to the destruction of relationships. Divorce lawyers claim that ‘cyber’ affairs lead to an increase in marriage breakdowns (Insley, 2009). Admittedly, many people find old friends with the help of Facebook. However, people also tend to substitute their real-life communication with cyber communication.

The latter seems perfect, and people focus on the imperfections of their personal lives. Eventually, many people break their real-life relationships to build new ones, which often terminate very soon. Therefore, it is important to ban Facebook to prevent people from the replacement of real life with an unreal life. Basically, this can be compared with the ban on drugs, which also leads to such replacement.

The only difference is that drug abuse has short-term consequences (health problems), whereas Facebook ‘abuse’ has long-term consequences (divorce, frustration, stress, possible drug abuse, etc.).

Finally, Facebook can also affect the development of society. For instance, many people claim that societies only benefit from the use of such social networks as Facebook since people can be aware of the real situation in their country and in the world. Some argue that governments often suppress media trying to juggle facts (Dunn, 2011).

Admittedly, people should share opinions and information. However, sometimes, social networks may be used to foment riots. Some argue that the ban of Facebook and other social networks (e.g., Twitter) proves that governments try to limit communications in order to control nations.

However, the example of Egypt or Libya shows that such a tool as Facebook is not the primary tool of communication as the discussion of important issues continues even after the ban on social networks (Dunn, 2011). Therefore, Facebook should be banned as it can lead to unrest in society.

On balance, although some people argue that Facebook is a helpful tool for communication, it should be banned as it has too many negative effects. It can lead to an increase in crimes and social unrest. It also negatively affects the personal lives of users as it negatively influences the development of real-life relationships.

Dunn, A. (2011). Unplugging a Nation: State Media Strategy during Egypt’s January 25 Uprising. The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, 35 (2), 15-24.

Insley, J. (2009). Cyber Affairs Cited in Breakdown of Real Marriages. The Guardian , n.p.

• Johnson And Johnson Company
• Advertising and Branding: Product Positioning
• Bisphenol-A Should be Banned
• Should Huck Finn Be Banned in Schools? Huckleberry Finn Should Not Be Banned Essay
• Why Assault Weapons Should Be Banned?
• The Chronograph Watch's Advertisement
• Facebook's Marketing and Communication Patterns
• Facebook Should Be Banned
• The Use of Sexual Themes in Advertising
• An Analysis of Facebook and Twitter
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, March 30). Facebook Should Be Banned Essay (Privacy Invasion, Social Effects, etc.). https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-should-be-banned-2/

"Facebook Should Be Banned Essay (Privacy Invasion, Social Effects, etc.)." IvyPanda , 30 Mar. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-should-be-banned-2/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Facebook Should Be Banned Essay (Privacy Invasion, Social Effects, etc.)'. 30 March.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Facebook Should Be Banned Essay (Privacy Invasion, Social Effects, etc.)." March 30, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-should-be-banned-2/.

1. IvyPanda . "Facebook Should Be Banned Essay (Privacy Invasion, Social Effects, etc.)." March 30, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-should-be-banned-2/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Facebook Should Be Banned Essay (Privacy Invasion, Social Effects, etc.)." March 30, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/facebook-should-be-banned-2/.

• Effects of Social Media and Internet Words: 601
• Social Media in Business Across the Globe Words: 1399
• Impact of Social Media in Education Words: 1988
• Negative Effects of Social Media on Health Words: 1166
• Social Media in Moderation Words: 1444
• The Power of Social Media Words: 2322
• How Social Media Contribute to Mental Health Words: 1744
• Becoming Distant on Social Media Words: 572
• Social Media: Annotated Bibliography Words: 1064
• Opportunities Social Media Provides Words: 558

Should Social Media Be Banned?

Social media is a platform where people from across the globe interact, share information, and communicate with each other; it consists of synergetic Web 2.0 applications based on the Internet. Examples of these sites include Whatsapp, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, and Snapchat (Bilgin 128). It has brought the world together and made it easier for people to socialize and conduct business practices. It comes with an array of benefits as well as impacts considered harmful. Some researchers are of the idea that social media should be banned due to its adverse effects, while others are against this idea. The paper provides arguments in favor of social media by presenting viewpoints from two peer-reviewed articles that support social media’s efficacy in contemporary society, particularly concerning its significance in education and business practices.

Social media plays a crucial role in enhancing education and has been associated with positive impacts on teaching faculty’s output. A study conducted by Tulu which aimed at ascertaining the effects of online social media use among Ambo University’s academic staff revealed its efficacy in enhancing productivity in the teaching and learning process (1100). Research findings further indicated that social media provided educators with a platform to share knowledge and connect with other teachers from different institutions countrywide and globally (1098). The survey further recommended training academicians on the proper use of social media to derive substantial benefits in their operations. Furthermore, social media offers students a medium for obtaining meaningful information and linking with study groups and other education systems, thereby enhancing learning efficiency. Social networking tools also provide academic institutions and learners with the opportunity to enhance the training methods used in class. They allow the integration of social media plugins, which foster interaction and sharing of information. Students may also benefit from online resources and tutorials disseminated through LMS and social networks.

Social media also plays a crucial role in fostering business practices through online marketing. This approach has been adopted by various companies, for instance, Apple Inc. and Nike, to increase their brand awareness. Businesses typically use platforms such as Facebook and Instagram to establish brand recognition, generate conversations regarding their specific products and services, connect with clients through social listening, and collect data from consumers to improve their operations or product quality (Bilgin 129). Bilgin also highlights the importance of this technology in enhancing brand loyalty and better consumer experiences through developing a two-way communication system: instant interaction and consumer feedback (130). Furthermore, according to Bilgin, social media presents a cost-effective platform for a firm’s advertising strategy (132). Almost all social media networking platforms allow consumers to create accounts and sign up for free. Social media presence also enhances an organization’s SEO rankings, increased traffic, marketplace awareness, and brand authority.

In summary, social media plays a vital role in our everyday lives through enhancing social interactions and promoting business practices, and, therefore, it should not be banned. It shapes how we connect to acquire and share information among peers. Social media is instrumental in enhancing educational activities and fostering teachers’ productivity by improving their knowledge base by connecting with colleagues. Furthermore, social media is quickly becoming one of the most crucial digital marketing aspects, which offers incredible benefits and promotes business capacity to reach multiple clients globally. It encourages improved brand loyalty and awareness, engagement with consumers, customer satisfaction, increased traffic, and market knowledge.

Works Cited

Bilgin, Yusuf. “The Effect of Social Media Marketing Activities on Brand Awareness, Brand Image, and Brand Loyalty.” Business and Management Studies: An International Journal , vol. 6, no. 1, 2018, pp. 128–148.

Tulu, Daniel, Tadesse. “Should Online Social Medias (OSMs) be Banned at Work? The Impact of Social Medias on Employee Productivity in Ambo University, a Case Study.” Research in International Business and Finance , vol. 42, 2017, pp. 1096–1102.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, March 16). Should Social Media Be Banned? https://studycorgi.com/should-social-media-be-banned/

"Should Social Media Be Banned?" StudyCorgi , 16 Mar. 2022, studycorgi.com/should-social-media-be-banned/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Should Social Media Be Banned'. 16 March.

1. StudyCorgi . "Should Social Media Be Banned?" March 16, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/should-social-media-be-banned/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Should Social Media Be Banned?" March 16, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/should-social-media-be-banned/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Should Social Media Be Banned?" March 16, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/should-social-media-be-banned/.

This paper, “Should Social Media Be Banned?”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: November 8, 2023 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

The Unintended Consequences of Banning Social Media

Severely limiting teen access to social media might do more harm than good..

Posted February 20, 2023 | Reviewed by Vanessa Lancaster

• What Changes During Adolescence?
• Find a therapist to support kids and teens
• Severely limiting social media might have serious unintended consequences for teens.
• State legislation limiting social media often doesn't take complexity or nuance into account.
• Such legislation will likely have no measurable impact on improving youth mental health.
• States should consider investing in widespread media literacy education instead of attempting to limit access.

I recently attended a mental health and social media symposium organized by Spencer Cox, the governor of my home state of Utah. Cox threw down the gauntlet :

"There is a compounding effect [of social media] that is impacting all of us and I am deeply worried about it. I know we have some social media companies in the room; we're glad you're here. We are putting you on notice. You have some options. You can fight, and that's fine. We're ready for the fight. Or you can join us and be part of the solution."

The message from several speakers at the conference was very clear:

Social media is harming our youth and is responsible for the increase of mental health struggles over the past decade. We should ban social media and every responsible parent agrees with us. Social media companies are greedy and knowingly did harm, comparable to the executives who perpetrated the opioid crisis.

Social media has become the ultimate scapegoat of our time. As large social media companies rake in billions, it is easy to cast them in the role of the villain. Adolescent anxiety and depression have risen over the past decade, and we want someone to blame.

As a result, states are suing social media companies for being responsible for mental health problems in their community. Legislators across the country are debating whether social media is responsible for the increase in mental health problems in youth.

In my state, there was a bill being introduced that was considering an outright ban on social media for anyone under the age of 18. The bill was softened slightly to require parent ID for any underage youth. Other states have introduced similar bills to significantly limit youth access to social media.

As a collective nation, we are at a fever pitch and out for blood. There is just one problem with this collective anger : It’s not supported by the research.

I am a social media scholar and have been studying the impact of media on children for twenty years. The collective research does not support banning social media and suggests it might harm some youth in the process.

Most serious social media scholars are left shaking our heads with the over-confident and definitive statements we hear from politicians and the press. The public discussion is dominated by some loud voices who are quick to point fingers but slow to consult the full body of research, which shows considerable nuance and complexity.

Can we just stop and take a breath for a minute? Consider that perhaps we might be going in the wrong direction.

The kids are struggling, but that doesn’t mean taking away social media will fix anything. Here are several reasons to believe that social media is not the cause of all our youth’s ills:

1. The link between social media and mental health is not as big as you think.

In fact, many studies show that it might even be negligible. For example, meta-analyses bringing together all the studies on this topic tend to bring back correlations of around .10, depending on the study, like the difference in height between a 15- and 16-year-old girl . This is really quite small considering the attention we have been giving this question.

Indeed, our research examined the time spent on social media, depression , and anxiety across the entire course of adolescence . We did not find a noticeable effect of social media on mental health when examined at the individual level. I was surprised, and it went against my hypothesis (gasp!). But I had to face the realization that this effect just isn’t as big as we thought it was.

The effects become larger (around .25, maybe comparable to the difference in height between a 15 and a 17-year-old girl) when we consider a teen who says they have “problems” with social media. Reducing problems around media (as opposed to the sheer time by banning social media) may be a more prudent way forward. (More on this below.)

2. The small and inconsistent findings might be about individual differences.

Some recent work out of the Netherlands suggests that the vast majority (92 percent) of adolescents have either a neutral or positive experience in terms of mental health after using social media. Using an assessment that measures how people feel in the moment, they were able to capture how adolescents felt while using social media. For the vast majority? They were just fine.

However, there is the question of that 8 percent struggle after being on social media. There are many explanations for why this might be the case. They could have had negative experiences online, such as being cyberbullied or excluded. They could be high on levels of rejection sensitivity , being fine-tuned to notice a social slight. They might have pre-existing body image concerns and spend their time on pro-anorexia sites . Or it might be something completely different. What the research suggests is that the vast majority of adolescents do quite well on social media, while a small minority do not.

3. Banning (or severely limiting) social media will likely hurt our most vulnerable adolescents. It might even be fatal.

When we think about depression and anxiety from a multifaceted lens, we recognize that some adolescents are much more vulnerable than others. These teens are often those who experience minority stress — unique stressors that occur in an adolescent’s environment as a result of their minority status.

This might include LGBTQ+ teens who might be the only “out” person at their school, who have to tolerate hearing gay slurs as they walk down the hallway. Or Black adolescents growing up in a predominantly white neighborhood who experience subtle (and often not so subtle) racism on a daily basis.

Research suggests that social media can provide a safe haven for these adolescents — a place where they can truly belong. Where they see others who are “like them.” Where they can find a real community that understands the stressors they go through each day.

Having a sense of belongingness is a huge protective factor against suicide . Thus, stripping away this sense of safety might have significant (and even deadly) unintended consequences for these youth that are already at risk.

Youth might also be turning to social media to cope with chaos and struggles in their lives. It might be that a teen has headphones on and is on social media to escape hearing his parents argue in the next room. Another might be getting support from online friends over something hard that happened at school. Yet another might struggle with social anxiety and experiences school as excruciating, yet has found online friends that make them feel like they can finally be themselves.

The experience of social media is extremely complex, and a complete ban will likely take away some truly positive coping skills for many.

4. Education , instead of fear , is likely the answer.

In our recent study , we found that time spent on social media had no effect on adolescent outcomes. However, body image was twice as good for teens who said they attended a school with a strong literacy program that helped them become healthy users of media. Depression, emotional problems, and conduct problems were also all reduced in such schools.

Instead of focusing so much on getting kids to put down their phones, instead of threatening to take phones away as a punishment , instead of overreacting as a country and banning a potentially useful tool that is a huge part of an adolescent’s social world, might we invest in education instead?

Imagine a world where every student had classes on digital literacy from an early age. Where they were taught not only how to use media but how to truly interpret it and to become critical thinkers of their media use. Imagine that adolescents utilized social media in ways that helped their mental health instead of hurting it. Where they had tools, and best practices to absolutely thrive in a digital environment.

Instead of being afraid and throwing out the baby with the bathwater, let’s step it up, America. Let’s invest in educating our youth at a national level, relying on balanced and accurate research to empower youth to truly take charge of their social media experiences for good.

Banning or severely limiting social media among adolescents is not the way forward and will have serious unintended consequences. It would be like letting a 16-year-old child drive without first having them take driver’s education. Instead of taking the keys away and randomly giving them back someday, can we please teach our kids to drive in this digital environment? It might just save a life.

A version of this post appears in the Salt Lake Tribune .

If you or someone you love is contemplating suicide, seek help immediately. For help 24/7, dial 988 for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, or reach out to the Crisis Text Line by texting TALK to 741741. To find a therapist, visit the Psychology Today Therapy Directory .

Sarah M. Coyne, Ph.D., is a professor of human development in the School of Family Life at Brigham Young University. She researches media, aggression, gender, and child development.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Social Media Companies Should Self-Regulate. Now.

• Michael A. Cusumano,
• Annabelle Gawer,
• David B. Yoffie

What they can learn from the TV, movie, and video game industries.

Tech companies face the real threat of government regulation in reaction to socially harmful content they are publishing. To avoid this, tech companies should form an industry coalition and take proactive steps to self-regulate now. Our research into industries including television, movies, and video games suggests effective self-regulation can benefit both society and companies, and keep government regulators at bay.

The world witnessed the worst example of the impact digital platforms can have on society with the debacle at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Not only did supporters of Donald Trump try to disrupt the certification of the Electoral College votes, but this deplorable incident was, in large part, fomented over social media.

• MC Michael A. Cusumano is the Sloan Distinguished Professor of Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management in Cambridge. He is co-author of  The Business of Platforms: Strategy in the Age of Digital Competition, Innovation and Power (2019) .
• AG Annabelle Gawer is chaired professor in digital economy and the director of the Centre of Digital Economy at the University of Surrey, UK. She is co-author of  The Business of Platforms: Strategy in the Age of Digital Competition, Innovation and Power (2019) .
• DY David B. Yoffie is the Max and Doris Starr Professor of International Business Administration at Harvard Business School. He is co-author of  The Business of Platforms: Strategy in the Age of Digital Competition, Innovation and Power (2019) .

Partner Center

Social media brings benefits and risks to teens. Psychology can help identify a path forward

New psychological research exposes the harms and positive outcomes of social media. APA’s recommendations aim to add science-backed balance to the discussion

Vol. 54 No. 6 Print version: page 46

• Social Media and Internet
• Technology and Design

This was the year that social media itself went viral—and not in a good way. In March, President Joe Biden threatened to ban the Chinese-owned video-sharing site TikTok. In April, a bipartisan group of senators introduced legislation to ban kids under 13 from joining social media. In May, the U.S. surgeon general issued an advisory urging action to protect children online ( Social Media and Youth Mental Health: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory , 2023 ). Just days earlier, APA issued its first-ever health advisory, providing recommendations to protect youth from the risks of social media ( Health Advisory on Social Media Use in Adolescence , 2023 ).

As youth mental health continues to suffer, parents, teachers, and legislators are sounding the alarm on social media. But fear and misinformation often go hand in hand. APA’s recommendations aim to add science-backed balance to the discussion. “There’s such a negative conversation happening around social media, and there is good reason for that. However, it’s important to realize there can be benefits for many teens,” said Jacqueline Nesi, PhD, an assistant professor of psychology at Brown University who studies technology use in youth, and a member of the APA panel that produced the health advisory. “Teens (and adults) obviously get something out of social media. We have to take a balanced view if we want to reach teens and help them use these platforms in healthier ways.”

[ Related:  What parents should know to keep their teens safe on social media ]

In 2023, an estimated 4.9 billion people worldwide are expected to use social media. For teens who grew up with technology, those digital platforms are woven into the fabric of their lives. “Social media is here to stay,” said Mary Alvord, PhD, a clinical psychologist in Maryland and adjunct professor at George Washington University, and a member of the APA panel. That doesn’t mean we have to accept its dangers, however. “Just as we decide when kids are old enough to drive, and we teach them to be good drivers, we can establish guidelines and teach children to use social media safely,” Alvord said.

Social media charms and harms

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide in young people were climbing. In 2021, more than 40% of high school students reported depressive symptoms, with girls and LGBTQ+ youth reporting even higher rates of poor mental health and suicidal thoughts, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( American Economic Review , Vol. 112, No. 11, 2022 ).

Young people may be particularly vulnerable to social media’s charms—as well as its harms. During adolescent development, brain regions associated with the desire for attention, feedback, and reinforcement from peers become more sensitive. Meanwhile, the brain regions involved in self-control have not fully matured. That can be a recipe for disaster. “The need to prioritize peers is a normal part of adolescent development, and youth are turning to social media for some of that longed-for peer contact,” said clinical psychologist Mary Ann McCabe, PhD, ABPP, a member-at-large of APA’s Board of Directors, adjunct associate professor of pediatrics at George Washington University School of Medicine, and cochair of the expert advisory panel. “The original yearning is social, but kids can accidentally wander into harmful content.”

[ Related: Potential risks of content, features, and functions: The science of how social media affects youth ]

The potential risks of social media may be especially acute during early adolescence when puberty delivers an onslaught of biological, psychological, and social changes. One longitudinal analysis of data from youth in the United Kingdom found distinct developmental windows during which adolescents are especially sensitive to social media’s impact. During those windows—around 11 to 13 for girls and 14 to 15 for boys—more social media use predicts a decrease in life satisfaction a year later, while lower use predicts greater life satisfaction ( Orben, A., et al.,  Nature Communications , Vol. 13, No. 1649, 2022 ).

One takeaway from such research is that adults should monitor kids’ social media use closely in early adolescence, between the ages of 10 and 14 or so. As kids become more mature and develop digital literacy skills, they can earn more autonomy.

The cost of connection

The internet is at its best when it brings people together. Adults can help kids get the most out of social media by encouraging them to use online platforms to engage with others in positive ways. “The primary benefit is social connection, and that’s true for teens who are connecting with friends they already have or making new connections,” Nesi said. “On social media, they can find people who share their identities and interests.”

Online social interaction can promote healthy socialization among teens, especially when they’re experiencing stress or social isolation. For youth who have anxiety or struggle in social situations, practicing conversations over social media can be an important step toward feeling more comfortable interacting with peers in person. Social media can also help kids stay in touch with their support networks. That can be especially important for kids from marginalized groups, such as LGBTQ+ adolescents who may be reluctant or unable to discuss their identity with caregivers ( Craig, S. L., et al.,  Social Media + Society , Vol. 7, No. 1, 2021 ). In such cases, online support can be a lifeline.

“We know from suicide prevention research that it’s critical for people to know they aren’t alone,” Alvord said.

Kids also learn about themselves online. “Social media provides a lot of opportunities for young people to discover new information, learn about current events, engage with issues, and have their voices heard,” Nesi added. “And it gives them an opportunity to explore their identities, which is an important task of the adolescent years.”

Yet all those opportunities come at a cost. “There is a lot of good that can come from social media. The problem is, the algorithms can also lead you down rabbit holes,” Alvord said. Technology is expertly designed to pull us in. Features such as “like” buttons, notifications, and videos that start playing automatically make it incredibly hard to step away. At the extreme, social media use can interfere with sleep, physical activity, schoolwork, and in-person social interactions. “The risk of technologies that pull us in is that they can get in the way of all the things we know are important for a teen’s development,” Nesi said.

Research suggests that setting limits and boundaries around social media, combined with discussion and coaching from adults, is the best way to promote positive outcomes for youth ( Wachs, S., et al.,  Computers & Education , Vol. 160, No. 1, 2021 ). Parents should talk to kids often about social media and technology and also use strategies like limiting the amount of time kids can use devices and removing devices from the bedroom at night. Caregivers should also keep an eye out for problematic behaviors, such as strong cravings to use social media, an inability to stop, and lying or sneaking around in order to use devices when they aren’t allowed.

[ Related:   How much is too much social media use: A Q&A with Mitch Prinstein, PhD ]

In helping to set boundaries around social media, it’s important that parents don’t simply limit access to devices, Alvord added. “Removing devices can feel punitive. Instead, parents should focus on encouraging kids to spend time with other activities they find valuable, such as movement and art activities they enjoy,” she said. “When kids are spending more time on those things, they’re less likely to be stuck on social media.”

Dangerous content

Spending too much time on social media is one cause for concern. Dangerous content is another. Despite efforts by caregivers and tech companies to protect kids from problematic material, they still encounter plenty of it online—including mis- and disinformation, racism and hate speech, and content that promotes dangerous behaviors such as disordered eating and self-harm.

During the first year of the pandemic, when kids were spending more time at home and online, McCabe saw a flurry of new diagnoses of eating disorders in her teen patients and their friends. “These kids often reported that they started by watching something relatively benign, like exercise videos,” she said. But their social media algorithms doubled down on that content, offering up more and more material related to body image and weight. “It was an echo chamber,” McCabe added. “And several of my patients attributed their eating disorders to this online behavior.”

Unfortunately, McCabe’s observations seem to be part of a common pattern. A large body of research, cited in APA’s health advisory, suggests that using social media for comparisons and feedback related to physical appearance is linked to poorer body image, disordered eating, and depressive symptoms, especially among girls.

Other research shows that when youth are exposed to unsafe behaviors online, such as substance use or self-harm, they may be at greater risk of engaging in similar behaviors themselves. In a longitudinal study of high school students, Nesi and colleagues showed that kids who saw their peers drinking alcohol on social media were more likely to start drinking and to binge drink 1 year later, even after controlling for demographic and developmental risk factors ( Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 60, No. 6, 2017 ).

Cyberbullying is another source of worry, both for young people and their caregivers. Indeed, research shows that online bullying and harassment can be harmful for a young person’s psychological well-being. APA’s health advisory cited several studies that found online bullying and harassment can be more severe than offline bullying. The research showed it can increase the risk of mental health problems in adolescents—with risks for both perpetrators and victims of cyberhate.

Ingrained racism

Search engines and social media algorithms can expose adolescents to other types of cyberhate, including racism. In fact, online algorithms often have structural racism and bias baked in, in ways that White users might not even notice. Sometimes, the algorithms themselves churn out biased or racist content. TikTok, for instance, has come under fire for recommending new accounts based on the appearance of the people a user already follows—with the inadvertent effect of segregating the platform. In addition to this form of “algorithmic bias,” people of color are frequently subjected to what some researchers call “filter bias.” In one common example, the beauty filters built into sites like Instagram or Snapchat might apply paler skin or more typically White facial features to a user’s selfies.

Like microaggressions in offline life, online racism in the form of algorithmic and filter bias can take a toll on mental health, said Brendesha Tynes, PhD, a professor of education and psychology at the University of Southern California, and a member of the APA advisory panel. In an ongoing daily diary study with adolescents, she is finding evidence that people who are exposed to algorithmic and filter bias are at increased risk of next-day depression and anxiety symptoms.

“I’m an adult who studies these issues and who has a lot of strategies to protect myself, and it can still be really hard” to cope with online racism, she said. Impressionable teens who haven’t learned such strategies are likely to experience even greater psychological impacts from the racism they encounter every day on social media. “We’re just beginning to understand the profound negative impacts of online racism,” Tynes said. “We need all hands on deck in supporting kids of color and helping them cope with these experiences.”

Despite the drawbacks of technology, there is a silver lining. Tynes has found Black youth receive valuable social support from other Black people on social media. Those interactions can help them learn to think critically about the racism they encounter. That’s important, since her research also shows that youth who are able to critique racism experience less psychological distress when they witness race-related traumatic events online ( Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 43, No. 6, 2008 ).

Tynes said more research is needed to understand how online racism affects youth and how best to protect them from its harms.

“Different groups have vastly different experiences online,” she said. “We need more detailed recommendations for specific groups.”

A role for psychology

How to protect kids from online racism is just one of a long list of questions on researchers’ wish lists. Digital technologies evolve so quickly that kids are off to a new platform before scientists can finish collecting data about yesterday’s favorite sites. “There’s so much we still don’t know about this topic. That’s understandably frustrating for people because social media is impacting people’s lives as we speak,” Nesi said.

It’s likely some groups, and some individuals, are more susceptible than others to the negative effects of social media, she added. “We need more information about who is more vulnerable and who is more resilient, and what it is they’re doing online that’s healthy versus harmful.”

While there is a lot of work to be done, Nesi said, “we’re getting closer.” As APA’s recommendations make clear, there is ample evidence some types of content and online behaviors can harm youth. Adult role models can work together with teens to understand the pitfalls of technology and establish boundaries to protect them from dangerous content and excessive screen time.

Psychological research shows children from a young age should be taught digital literacy skills such as identifying misinformation, protecting privacy, understanding how people can misrepresent themselves online, and how to critically evaluate race-related materials online. One way to promote those skills may be to lean into teens’ inherent skepticism of grown-ups. “You can teach kids that a lot of people want something from them,” Alvord said—whether it’s a stranger trying to message them on Instagram, or TikTok earning money by collecting their data or showing them branded content.

That’s not to say it’s easy to help kids develop a healthy relationship with social media. “By necessity, adolescents disagree more with their parents—and they are formidable when they insist on having something, like phones or social media, that all their friends have,” McCabe said. “But parents are eager for guidance. There is an appetite for this information now,” she added—and psychological scientists can help provide it.

That scientific research can inform broader efforts to keep children safe on social media as well. “Parents can’t do this alone,” Nesi said. “We need larger-scale changes to these platforms to protect kids.”

There are efforts to make such changes. The Kids Online Safety Act, a bipartisan bill introduced in April, establishes a duty of care for social media companies to protect minors from mental health harms, sex trafficking, narcotics, and other dangers. Additionally, the bill requires social media companies to go through independent, external audits, allows researcher access to platform data assets, and creates substantial youth and parental controls to create a safer digital environment. Even as legislators and tech companies consider those and other policies, researchers can continue their efforts to determine which actions might be most protective, said Nesi, who is currently leading a study to understand which features of social media are helpful versus harmful for kids at high risk of suicide. “For some kids, being able to connect with others and find support is really important. For others, social media may create more challenges than it solves,” Nesi said. “The key is making sure we don’t accidentally do any harm” by enacting restrictions and legislation that are not backed by science.

While researchers forge ahead, clinical psychologists, too, can add valuable insight for teens and their families. “Screens are a central part of adolescents’ lives, and that needs to be integrated into assessment and treatment,” Nesi said. “Clinicians can help families and teens take a step back and look at their social media use to figure out what’s working for them and what isn’t.”

Someday, McCabe said, digital literacy may be taught in schools the same way that youth learn about sexual health and substance use. “I hope we’ll come to a point where teaching about the healthy use of social media is an everyday occurrence,” she said. “Because of this dialogue that we’re having now among families and policymakers, we may see a new generation of kids whose entry into the digital world is very different, where we can use social media for connection and education but minimize the harms,” she added. “I hope this is the beginning of a new day.”

Social media recommendations

APA’s Health Advisory on Social Media Use in Adolescence makes these recommendations based on the scientific evidence to date:

• Youth using social media should be encouraged to use functions that create opportunities for social support, online companionship, and emotional intimacy that can promote healthy socialization.
• Social media use, functionality, and permissions/consenting should be tailored to youths’ developmental capabilities; designs created for adults may not be appropriate for children.
• In early adolescence (i.e., typically 10–14 years), adult monitoring (i.e., ongoing review, discussion, and coaching around social media content) is advised for most youths’ social media use; autonomy may increase gradually as kids age and if they gain digital literacy skills. However, monitoring should be balanced with youths’ appropriate needs for privacy.
• To reduce the risks of psychological harm, adolescents’ exposure to content on social media that depicts illegal or psychologically maladaptive behavior, including content that instructs or encourages youth to engage in health-risk behaviors, such as self-harm (e.g., cutting, suicide), harm to others, or those that encourage eating-disordered behavior (e.g., restrictive eating, purging, excessive exercise) should be minimized, reported, and removed; moreover, technology should not drive users to this content.
• To minimize psychological harm, adolescents’ exposure to “cyberhate” including online discrimination, prejudice, hate, or cyberbullying especially directed toward a marginalized group (e.g., racial, ethnic, gender, sexual, religious, ability status), or toward an individual because of their identity or allyship with a marginalized group should be minimized.
• Adolescents should be routinely screened for signs of “problematic social media use” that can impair their ability to engage in daily roles and routines, and may present risk for more serious psychological harms over time.
• The use of social media should be limited so as to not interfere with adolescents’ sleep and physical activity.
• Adolescents should limit use of social media for social comparison, particularly around beauty- or appearance-related content.
• Adolescents’ social media use should be preceded by training in social media literacy to ensure that users have developed psychologically-informed competencies and skills that will maximize the chances for balanced, safe, and meaningful social media use.
• Substantial resources should be provided for continued scientific examination of the positive and negative effects of social media on adolescent development.

Read the full recommendations and see the science behind them .

Further reading

Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism Noble, S. U., New York University Press, 2018

Family Online Safety Institute

An updated agenda for the study of digital media use and adolescent development: Future directions following Odgers & Jensen (2020) Prinstein, M. J., et al., The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 2020

From Google searches to Russian disinformation: Adolescent critical race digital literacy needs and skills Tynes, B., et al., International Journal of Multicultural Education , 2021

How social media affects teen mental health: A missing link Orben, A., & Blakemore, S.J. Nature , Feb. 14, 2023

Techno Sapiens

Recommended Reading

Six Things Psychologists are Talking About

The APA Monitor on Psychology ® sister e-newsletter offers fresh articles on psychology trends, new research, and more.

Welcome! Thank you for subscribing.

Speaking of Psychology

Subscribe to APA’s audio podcast series highlighting some of the most important and relevant psychological research being conducted today.

Subscribe to Speaking of Psychology and download via:

Contact APA

You may also like.

• Alternatives

Reasons For An Instagram Ban: Everything You Need to Know

• July 28, 2024
• by Ricky Spears

Instagram Ban Reasons: What You Need to Know in 2024-2024

As an avid Instagram user and social media expert, I‘ve seen countless accounts fall victim to the dreaded "ban hammer." Whether it‘s a temporary action block or a permanent account disable, getting banned on Instagram can be a frustrating and confusing experience. In this comprehensive guide, I‘ll break down the top reasons why Instagram bans accounts, how to avoid common pitfalls, and what to do if you find yourself on the wrong side of the platform‘s rules.

The Ugly Truth About Instagram Bans

First, let‘s address the elephant in the room: Instagram bans are becoming more common and more severe. In recent years, the platform has cracked down on inauthentic activity, inappropriate content, and violations of its terms of service. This means that even unintentional missteps can result in harsh penalties, from losing access to certain features to having your account permanently disabled.

According to Instagram‘s latest transparency report, the platform removed over 30 million pieces of content in the second half of 2022 alone. The most common reasons for removal were spam, nudity, and hate speech. But even if you‘re not posting anything explicitly against the rules, you could still be at risk of a ban if you engage in suspicious activity or use unauthorized third-party tools.

Top 10 Reasons for Instagram Account Bans

So, what exactly can get you banned on Instagram? Here are the top 10 reasons, based on my research and experience:

• Posting inappropriate content, such as nudity, violence, hate speech, or self-harm
• Buying fake followers, likes, or comments to artificially inflate your engagement
• Using unauthorized third-party apps or automation tools to post, follow, or message
• Selling or promoting illegal products or services, such as drugs or weapons
• Violating intellectual property rights by posting copyrighted or trademarked content
• Engaging in harassing, bullying, or abusive behavior towards other users
• Creating multiple accounts for the purpose of spamming or inauthentic activity
• Attempting to hack or phish other users‘ accounts or personal information
• Impersonating other users, brands, or public figures in a misleading way
• Sharing misinformation, fake news, or conspiracy theories that could cause real-world harm

Of course, this is not an exhaustive list, and Instagram‘s moderation policies are constantly evolving. But if you steer clear of these major no-nos, you‘ll be much less likely to run afoul of the platform‘s rules.

The Three Types of Instagram Bans

Not all Instagram bans are created equal. Depending on the severity of the offense and the user‘s history, the platform may impose different levels of restrictions. Here are the three main types of bans you should be aware of:

Temporary Action Blocks: These are the most common type of ban, and they typically last from a few hours to a few days. If you‘ve been posting, following, liking, or commenting too aggressively, Instagram may temporarily block your ability to perform those actions. This is usually a warning shot, and your account will be restored once the block expires.

Shadow Bans: A shadow ban is a more subtle form of restriction, where your content becomes less visible to other users. If you‘ve been using banned hashtags, posting spammy comments, or engaging in other sketchy behavior, Instagram may limit the reach of your posts without notifying you. The only way to tell if you‘ve been shadow banned is to check your engagement metrics and see if there‘s a sudden drop-off.

Permanent Account Disabling: This is the most severe form of ban, and it means your account has been terminated indefinitely. If you‘ve repeatedly violated Instagram‘s terms of service, posted illegal content, or engaged in hacking or phishing attempts, your account may be permanently disabled without warning. In some cases, you may be able to appeal the decision, but there‘s no guarantee your account will be restored.

How to Avoid Getting Banned on Instagram

Now that you know the risks and consequences of Instagram bans, let‘s talk about how to stay in the platform‘s good graces. Here are some expert tips for avoiding common ban triggers:

Read and follow Instagram‘s terms of service and community guidelines. Ignorance is not an excuse, so make sure you understand what‘s allowed and what‘s not.

Post original, high-quality content that provides value to your followers. Avoid reposting or stealing other users‘ content without permission.

Engage authentically with other users by leaving thoughtful comments, answering questions, and participating in relevant conversations. Don‘t spam or harass anyone.

Be careful with hashtags. Avoid using banned or spammy hashtags, and don‘t use too many hashtags in a single post (aim for 5-10 at most).

Limit your use of automation and third-party tools. While some apps are allowed, such as scheduling tools, anything that automates following, liking, or commenting is strictly prohibited.

Respect other people‘s intellectual property rights. Don‘t post copyrighted music, videos, or images without permission, and don‘t use trademarked logos or slogans without authorization.

If you see something, say something. Report inappropriate content, spam, or abusive behavior using Instagram‘s built-in tools. This helps keep the platform safe for everyone.

Secure your account by verifying your email address and phone number, enabling two-factor authentication, and using a strong, unique password. This can help prevent hacking attempts.

If you do get banned, don‘t panic. Check your email for any messages from Instagram, and follow the instructions to appeal the decision if you believe it was made in error. Be patient and polite in your communication with support.

The Future of Instagram Bans

As Instagram continues to grow and evolve, so too will its approach to banning and moderating content. In recent years, we‘ve seen a number of major updates and trends that give us a glimpse of what the future may hold:

Increased focus on transparency and authenticity: Instagram is working to make its policies and enforcement actions more clear and consistent, with regular reports and updates on content removals and account bans.

Stricter enforcement against hate speech and misinformation: In light of recent events and social movements, Instagram is doubling down on its efforts to remove harmful content and prevent the spread of false information.

New features for creators and small businesses: Instagram is rolling out more tools and resources to help creators and entrepreneurs succeed on the platform, such as shopping tags, branded content ads, and creator studios.

Improved accessibility and user control over data privacy: Instagram is making it easier for users to manage their data and privacy settings, with new features like Access Your Information and Download Your Data.

Integration with other Meta platforms: As Instagram‘s parent company Facebook rebrands to Meta, we may see more cross-platform features and policies that affect how content is moderated and shared across apps.

Of course, these are just predictions based on current trends, and the future is always uncertain. But one thing is clear: Instagram is committed to creating a safe, authentic, and enjoyable experience for its billion-plus users, and that means taking a hard line against bans and policy violations.

The Bottom Line

Getting banned on Instagram is no joke, but it‘s also not the end of the world. By understanding the rules, posting responsibly, and engaging authentically with other users, you can minimize your risk and maximize your success on the platform. And if you do find yourself on the wrong end of a ban, remember that there are steps you can take to appeal the decision and get your account reinstated.

At the end of the day, Instagram is a powerful tool for connecting with friends, followers, and customers, but it‘s also a privilege that comes with certain responsibilities. By being a good citizen of the platform and respecting its policies, you can help make Instagram a better place for everyone.

Stay safe, stay authentic, and happy gramming!

Did you like this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

Essay Service Examples Sociology Social Media

Should TikTok Be Banned: Argumentative Essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Related essay topics.

Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.

Related articles

Most popular essays

• Self Esteem
• Social Media

Social media has a major impact on todays world. Every platform affects the way people view both...

• Gender Differences
• Masculinity

Research shows a link between masculine roles, depression and social media (SM). This was explored...

• Effects of Social Media

YouTube has become one of the biggest social media platforms today. Its popularity has grown...

• Perspective

There are many consequences Instagram have on society. The main being mental health. Based of a...

Social media has become an integral part of our lives, revolutionizing the way we communicate,...

The ongoing debate over whether Instagram provides more benefits than harms is a controversial...

Social media platforms like Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter, are some of the many means of...

Social networks have changed our ways of life, many think that for better and others for worse,...

Should social media be used to employ or discharge an employee? What is social media? Social media...

Join our 150k of happy users

• Get original paper written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

• Latest Latest
• The West The West
• Sports Sports
• Opinion Opinion
• Magazine Magazine

Should children under 16 be denied access to social media apps?

Utah rep. chris stewart says social media use leading to depression, anxiety among children.

By Dennis Romboy

Tweens and teens spend as much as nine hours a day scrolling through social media, gaming, online shopping, video chatting and texting on their cell phones.

And an increasing amount of evidence suggests all that screen time is taking a toll on their mental health.

“The statistics are clear we’ve got a generation of young people that are the most distressed, anxious, depressed and tragically suicidal than any generation in our history,” said Rep. Chris Stewart, who was recently named co-chairman of the bipartisan Mental Health Caucus in Congress.

The rise in anxiety and depression, he says, can be almost directly correlated to when Facebook bought Instagram in 2012 and began marketing initially to girls and then boys as young as 9. The Chinese app TikTok, he said, was designed as “emotional heroin” for young people.

“We just think we’ve got to do something,” he said.

Stewart, a Republican, believes he has a solution to the mental health crisis among adolescents: Make it illegal for social media platforms to provide access to children under 16. He intends to introduce legislation that would make social media companies responsible for age verification of their users.

The law wouldn’t displace parents’ decisions about their children’s social media use but help them avoid something harmful, he said.

“The government is involved with regulating when my children can drink, when they can smoke, when they can drive,” Stewart said. “We think society has a responsibility to protect young people and government should help in protecting them.”

Since 2000, the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has required websites and online services to get parental consent before collecting data of children under 13. But it is rarely enforced. Stewart’s bill would basically raise the age to 16.

Stewart said he expects social media companies will “hate this” but that he’s willing to take their arrows “if we can do some good here.”

“They know if they can get someone addicted to social media at 9, they’ve got them for the rest of their lives,” he said.

Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, didn’t have a position on Stewart’s yet-to-be-filed legislation Monday, but pointed to steps it has taken to protect young people, including age-appropriate default settings, tools to encourage teens to spend time away from Instagram, and continuing to bring age verification to the platform.

“We have the same goals as policymakers,” according to Meta. “We have long advocated for clear industry standards in areas like age verification, and developing experiences that are age-appropriate.”

NetChoice, a tech industry group that includes Meta, Google, TikTok and Twitter, says education for both parents and children is the answer, not the “heavy-handed” government regulation Stewart is proposing.

Such laws are not only unenforceable but violate the First Amendment, said Carl Szabo, NetChoice vice president and general counsel.

Also, he said there’s a reason Congress set the age at 13 in the federal law. There’s an emotional and social differential between a 13-year-old and 15-year-old, who typically can drive a car, attend high school and is becoming less dependent on parents.

“This is well-intentioned. I think parenting in the 21st century is incredibly challenging,” Szabo said of Stewart’s proposal. “Now is there something that could be done? One-hundred percent.”

Szabo pointed to Florida and Indiana lawmakers considering legislation to require social media education in schools. The materials, he said, would be presented not only to kids but to their parents.

“Let’s see how that goes first,” he said.

The better approach, Szabo said, is to not try to replace parents as California has done with its Age-Appropriate Design Code Act.

Modeled off standards in the United Kingdom, the  California law  requires the highest privacy settings to be turned on by default for minors. It also says that online services targeting kids under 18 must assess the risk of harm to those users that could come from potentially harmful messages or exploitation. It’s set to take effect in July 2024.

“California has stepped in between parents and their teenagers,” Szabo said.

NetChoice sued California over the law, arguing it violates the First Amendment. “There’s a First Amendment right for teenagers. There’s a First Amendment right for the internet,” he said.

Stewart said his legislation has Democratic co-sponsors and his initial talks with the White House have been encouraging.

In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal about big Big Tech “abuses” last week, President Joe Biden said Democrats and Republicans can find common ground on protection of privacy, competition and children.

“Millions of young people are struggling with bullying, violence, trauma and mental health. We must hold social-media companies accountable for the experiment they are running on our children for profit,” the president wrote.

A Pew Research Center survey found 95% of 13- to 17-year-olds have access to a smartphone.

Between 2009 and 2017, the number of 8th graders using social media every day rose from 46% to 78%, and the time high school students spent online doubled. Common Sense Media estimates that children ages 8 to 12 spent five and a half hours a day on screens in 2021, and teens ages 13 to 18 spent nearly nine hours a day, according to research compiled by the Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institute at Brigham Young University.

A study by the two institutes found that teens who devote more than eight hours a day to screen time were about twice as likely to be depressed as their peers who were on screens less often than that.

In the past decade, anxiety, depression and teen suicide have surged, especially among girls, since the mass adoption of smartphones around 2010, according to University of Virginia sociologist Brad Wilcox, a fellow of the Institute for Family Studies and the American Enterprise Institute, and Riley Peterson, an undergraduate in religion and sociology at Baylor University.

Depression more than  doubled , from 12% in 2010 to 26% today for teen girls. Emergency room visits for self-inflicted injuries almost  doubled  over the same period, again for teen girls. And teen suicide among girls has risen to a  40-year high , Wilcox and Riley wrote in a recent Deseret News piece.

“We can’t just turn away from it. We can’t just ignore it. We can’t just pat them on the back and say ‘hey, you’ll feel better’ and ignore it,” Stewart said.

Stewart’s bill would give states the authority to file a civil action on behalf of its residents if a social media platform violates the regulations. It also gives parents a right to sue on behalf of their children. It allows the Federal Trade Commission to impose fines for violations.

Seattle public schools recently sued the companies behind Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube, claiming the platforms are largely responsible for a major decline in young people’s mental health.

Szabo said there’s a simple reason that the social-emotional state of not only teenagers but all Americans is at an all-time low. “It happens to do with being locked down in our homes for two years,” he said, referring to the COVID-19 pandemic. “That seems to be hand-waved away.”

The only lifeline kids had was through technology, he said.

“It seems silly to lay the blame at the feet of technology even though it seems to be an easy answer,” Szabo said. “Society goes through this every time we have a new technology.”

We need your support today

Independent journalism is more important than ever. Vox is here to explain this unprecedented election cycle and help you understand the larger stakes. We will break down where the candidates stand on major issues, from economic policy to immigration, foreign policy, criminal justice, and abortion. We’ll answer your biggest questions, and we’ll explain what matters — and why. This timely and essential task, however, is expensive to produce.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Has TikTok made us better? Or much, much worse?

The case for and against TikTok as a cultural force.

by Rebecca Jennings

You’ve likely heard that the US government is trying to ban TikTok . Lawmakers want to force TikTok to divest from its China-based parent company, ByteDance, and become a fully US-based company; if that doesn’t work (the Chinese government has said it would oppose this ), a ban could come in the form of an executive order forbidding business transactions with TikTok, i.e., prohibiting it from the Apple and Android app stores.

Sign up for the Vox Culture newslett er

Each week we’ll send you the very best from the Vox Culture team, plus a special internet culture edition by Rebecca Jennings on Wednesdays. Sign up here .

The government’s ostensible reasoning for all of this complicated, confusing, and extremely showboat-y hubbub, which included last week’s hearing with TikTok CEO Shou Chew , is national security. A large and bipartisan swath of Congress is concerned that because ByteDance is based in China, the Chinese government could access American users’ data and push or suppress certain kinds of content to Americans. Judging by many of the questions asked by congresspeople (one wondered if TikTok had access to his “home WiFi network”), officials barely seem to grasp what TikTok is, framing it as either single-handedly responsible for all the mischief kids get up to online or as a Chinese psy-op.

While these concerns are not exactly throwaways, they don’t address the more existential question of TikTok’s five-year presence on Americans’ phones (more than 150 million of them!): Is TikTok a force for good? What even is “good” on the internet? Can a social platform ever aspire to be it, much less embody it?

TikTok is inherently different from Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, BeReal (at least the people still using it ), or any of the other social apps begging for our attention. What do we lose if we lose TikTok? I’m not talking so much about the people whose livelihoods are tied up in it — those people will surely lose business and clout, but many of them will or already have pivoted to other platforms. I’m talking more about the things you can’t quantify: the explosion of creativity you’ll see in just a few scrolls spent on TikTok, the bringing together of hundreds of cultures, the ways in which TikTok does and doesn’t act as a democratizing force. Have we been asking the wrong questions about TikTok the whole time? Whether or not you’re being spied on, is it an app even worth using at all? Here, the cases for and against TikTok.

What’s happening with TikTok in the US?

• Why does the US want to ban TikTok?
• Is TikTok dangerous?
• What is Congress doing?
• How would a TikTok ban be enforced?
• How is TikTok affecting young people?

TikTok is good, actually

When TikTok came on the scene in 2018, the only thing most people knew about it was that it was embarrassing . Having evolved from the platform Musical.ly , which was populated largely by children and young teenagers lip-syncing to sped-up versions of pop hits, TikTok took a few months to shed the stench of cringe content. Slowly, however (and then much more quickly at the onset of the pandemic), more people were charmed by its unique video editing tools, the easy-to-replicate meme formats, and a new, burgeoning form of extremely silly comedy. In the depths of quarantine, TikTok offered an escape , whether it was in the form of scrolling through cutesy cottagecore content or families learning dance moves while stuck at home together.

The experience of using TikTok sets it apart from its competitors. As addicting as TikTok is, it does not beckon you with constant notifications the way Facebook and Instagram seem to constantly demand your attention, and when you spend more than an hour scrolling, TikTok will encourage you to take a break.

Even pre-pandemic, it was clear that TikTok was an extraordinarily powerful communication tool. First, it’s succinct: Until recently, all TikTok videos were capped at three minutes (the limit was originally 60 seconds). Second, you can go viral even if you don’t have any followers: Videos are served algorithmically to each user based on what they’ve engaged with in the past, and even videos from small accounts can pick up steam on people’s For You pages via a snowball effect. Third: Most of the time, you see the person’s face as they’re talking, creating a stronger, more familiar bond than if you’d simply read a tweet or listened to a podcast. Instead of feeling like you’re watching a stranger, when you see a person talking to you for long enough, they start to feel like someone you can trust.

While much of the attention on TikTok’s ability to make strangers feel like friends has focused on how it has hastened the spread of harmful misinformation, it has also encouraged young people to vote , to engage in local politics , and to organize — sometimes against TikTok itself . It has helped some teens embrace their own mediocrity on an internet that nearly always serves them people who are prettier, richer, and more talented than they are. It has inspired people to make fun iced coffee drinks , to pursue careers in arts and entertainment , to romanticize their lives , to feel more positively about their own bodies . It’s been a source of joy for people dying of terminal disease , an outlet for the grieving , a haven for queer and questioning kids , a diary for newly out trans people .

In a 2019 op-ed defending Twitter’s effect on culture, Sarah J. Jackson argues that despite its reputation of being a cesspit, the social app actually made us better people. The same argument can be made for TikTok. “Like all technological tools, Twitter can be exploited for evil and harnessed for good,” she writes. “Just as the printing press was used to publish content that argued fervently for slavery, it was also used by abolitionists to make the case for manumission. Just as radio and television were used to stir up the fervor of McCarthyism, they were also used to undermine it. Twitter has fallen short in many ways. But this decade, it helped ordinary people change our world.” TikTok is, at its best, a champion for ordinary people, for democracy, for debate, for discourse. That doesn’t mean it’s always nice, but it can be.

TikTok is bad, actually

Or maybe it’s all shitty, and we’re simply too addicted to scrolling through TikTok to notice or care how much it’s harming us. At least 15 children under 13 who tried to participate in its viral “blackout challenge” have died . While pursuing the dream that TikTok dangled in front of them — becoming an overnight superstar — many more have become burnt out , disillusioned , or otherwise hurt . “Dance used to be the most fun thing in my life and now I don’t like it. Social media has robbed me of that,” says TikTok’s biggest breakout star, Charli D’Amelio , in the first season of her reality show. “I don’t know how long anyone expects me to keep going as if nothing is wrong.”

Watch enough TikTok and you’ll start to see an extremely skewed version of the world, one where only the loudest, most extreme version of humanity is the kind worth noticing. On TikTok, it’s easy to get the sense that everyone is either beautiful or hideous, talented or cringe, billionaires or destitute, simply because extremes are what gets the most attention. As an algorithmically driven platform, TikTok rewards its users’ basest instincts . What hits on TikTok is a legible, irresistible hook — or, in other words, the kind of content that smacks you in the face with its obviousness.

One largely inconsequential example: At several points over the past three years, we’ve been told that millennials are at war with Gen Z . Despite the fact that a handful of viral TikToks hardly count as a “war,” the way TikTok amplifies meaningless controversy through algorithmic power and negativity bias is concerning, not just because young people desperately need solidarity to create a better world for all of us, but because these sorts of mostly made-up trends offer a distorted view of what the world’s actual immediate problems are. A far more consequential example: Accounts like @LibsofTikTok , which cherry-pick content from liberal or queer TikTokers and use them as strawmen for the left for their followers to mock and attack, function as rage-bait fueling the right-wing media. In the same way that “chronically online” discourse on Twitter distracts us with culture war kindling, TikTok makes it even more personal and ad hominem.

TikTok videos’ brevity only adds to this problem; the short, headline-grabbing content that goes the most viral is largely devoid of context and nuance, seemingly designed to distract and anger us further. Even something as simple as, say, a review of a new skin care product, is often framed in hyperbole — videos don’t travel unless you make it sound like “this is the BEST thing I’ve ever tried,” or its inverse: “All the videos encouraging you to buy this product are LIES!” What’s left is a cycle of buying and selling, loving and hating, embracing wholeheartedly and then forgetting, until you’re surrounded by barely used bottles in your bathroom cabinet and never-worn clothes for a trend that came and went by the time it arrived at your door.

This is to say nothing of the uneasy sensation of actually consuming TikTok, the reason that with every hour you spend on it, the app sends you a little PSA to maybe get off your phone and do something else for a while. Scrolling TikTok is the visual equivalent of a sensory deprivation tank, the adult version of transfixed toddlers staring at an iPad. It is a machine specifically engineered to get you to dissociate. In the span of about 30 seconds, you can watch a funny video of a puppy leaping into the snow, a sexy fan edit of a popular sci-fi franchise that may or may not be AI-generated, a poem about what it means to lose one’s mother, a makeup tutorial in which all the comments are people making fun of the person’s weight, a 22-year-old articulating why he doesn’t think his girlfriend should be allowed to hang out with other men. Unless you were enrolled in some kind of therapy intended to remove you from all groundedness in reality, nobody would argue that consuming in such a fashion is “good” for you.

TikTok isn’t the problem, actually

Lest it is not clear, I don’t think TikTok should be banned. I think the problems exacerbated by TikTok are the same problems exacerbated by algorithmically powered social media as a whole. The only winners of TikTok being banned would be Meta and Alphabet (i.e., Instagram and YouTube), companies that, while not carrying the political baggage of being based in China, are far more responsible for the sorry state of humanity under attention capitalism than TikTok.

In a fascinating interview with Current Affairs, author of Stolen Focus: Why You Can’t Pay Attention Johann Hari explains how social media distracts us from what’s important by shoving meaningless controversy in our faces. “How can we come together and achieve anything if we can’t listen and are constantly screaming at each other and constantly interacting through mediums designed to make us angry and hateful towards each other?” he asks. It’s not only collective action that social media makes us miss out on, though; Hari argues that when our attention is constantly fractured, you miss out on the less tangible aspects of what makes a full life. “If you can’t focus, you can’t form proper deep friendships and achieve meaningful work. You can’t have a meaningful life if you don’t experience depth and attention.”

Few people, including Hari, are advocating that social media should be banned altogether. It’s simply not compatible with the idea of a free and open internet, which, unless the US decides to erect its own version of China’s Great Firewall , is the internet Americans live in. That’s not to argue that major social media companies should be allowed to exist the way they have for the past decade and a half, which is to say by doing whatever they want and enticing people to spend as much time as possible on their websites.

Hari uses the example of how mothers in the 1970s rallied together to push back against the lead industry, which for decades had knowingly caused mental and psychological problems in children. “They didn’t say, ‘let’s ban all cars and gasoline’,” he explains, “they said: let’s ban the leaded gasoline and force the companies to move to a different business model that doesn’t poison our children.”

What would a business model for social media look like that didn’t prioritize time spent on the app? Hari suggests something like a subscription model, making users of social media sites the true customers, as opposed to the advertisers shopping for users’ data. “Suddenly, they’re not asking, ‘How do we hack and invade Nathan?’ Instead, they’re asking, ‘What does Nathan want?’” The other model would be something like the BBC, an independent but partially taxpayer-funded media institution, he says: “Think about the sewers: everyone listening or reading is near a sewer. Before we had sewers, we had sewage in the streets, people got cholera, and it was terrible. We all pay to build the sewers, and own and maintain them together. We might want to own the information pipes together, because we’re getting the equivalent of cholera, but with our attention and our politics.”

Making either of these changes would require an enormous psychic leap, particularly for Americans, whose fealty to the free market runs core to our identity. But Hari urges us to imagine it anyway. “We are not medieval peasants begging at the courts of King Zuckerberg and King Musk for a few little crumbs of attention from their table,” he says. “We are the free citizens of democracies, and we own our own minds. And together, we can take them back if we’re determined to.”

I don’t think that banning TikTok is a step toward democracy. That we are even considering it does, however, reveal that companies are not kings; that they are subject to the rule of law just as we are. It’s possible that if Americans can envision a world in which an entire, hugely powerful social network is kicked out of our country, perhaps more of them can be transformed into a force that works for us rather than against us. Personally, I’d start by taking a hard look at the companies that have been here longer.

This column was first published in the Vox Culture newsletter. Sign up here so you don’t miss the next one, plus get newsletter exclusives.

• Internet Culture
• Social Media

More in this stream

Most Popular

• There’s a fix for AI-generated essays. Why aren’t we using it?
• Did Brittany Mahomes’s Donald Trump support put her on the outs with Taylor Swift?
• Conservatives are shocked — shocked! — that Tucker Carlson is soft on Nazis
• The hidden reason why your power bill is so high
• Has The Bachelorette finally gone too far?

Today, Explained

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

This is the title for the native ad

More in Culture

The DOJ says Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson and others were unwitting Russian stooges.

Inside Gen Alpha’s relationship with tech.

The Bachelorette finale was riveting TV — and unfathomably cruel.

How China’s first global gaming blockbuster became a weird rallying point for the right.

Jennifer Lopez’s and Ben Affleck’s reactions to their split are both very on-brand and kind of pointless.

The back-and-forth over a wildly rare appeal is a win for victim’s rights.

Essay on Facebook should be banned

Facebook is one of the most widely used social media platforms in the world, with over 2 billion monthly active users. However, as the use of Facebook has become more prevalent, there have been growing concerns about its negative impact on society. Some argue that Facebook should be banned in order to protect users from the negative effects of social media.

One of the main arguments in favor of banning Facebook is that it can have a negative impact on mental health. Studies have shown that the use of social media can be linked to issues such as anxiety, depression, and loneliness. This is particularly true for individuals who spend a lot of time on social media and who compare their lives to the lives of others on the platform. By banning Facebook, it would help to reduce the amount of time people spend on social media, which would help to improve their mental health.

Another argument in favor of banning Facebook is that it can be a source of misinformation. Facebook has been criticized for its role in spreading fake news and misinformation. This can be particularly dangerous when it comes to issues such as politics and public health, as it can lead to the spread of false information and can have a negative impact on public opinion. By banning Facebook, it would help to reduce the spread of misinformation and fake news.

A ban on Facebook would also benefit privacy. Facebook has been criticized for its handling of user data and for its lack of transparency when it comes to data collection and sharing. Many users are unaware of the extent to which their personal information is being collected, shared, and used by the platform and third-party companies. A ban on Facebook would help to protect users’ personal information and privacy.

Despite the arguments in favor of banning Facebook, there are also some arguments against it. One of the main arguments against banning Facebook is that it would be difficult to enforce. With the widespread use of social media, it would be difficult to completely eliminate the use of Facebook.

Another argument against banning Facebook is that it would negatively impact businesses that use the platform to advertise and connect with customers. Facebook is an important marketing tool for many businesses, and a ban on the platform would have a significant impact on these businesses.

While Facebook is one of the most widely used social media platforms in the world, there are growing concerns about its negative impact on society. Some argue that Facebook should be banned in order to protect users from the negative effects of social media, such as mental health issues, misinformation, and privacy concerns. However, there are also arguments against a ban, such as the difficulty of enforcement and the impact on businesses that use the platform. Instead of an outright ban, governments and Facebook could implement policies to mitigate the negative effects of the platform such as strict regulations on data collection and sharing, and monitoring and removal of misinformation, also providing users with more control over their data and privacy settings. Additionally, education campaigns on the responsible use of social media and its potential negative effects could be carried out to help users make informed decisions about their use of the platform. Ultimately, the goal should be to strike a balance between the benefits of social media and the protection of users from its negative effects.

What the debate over TikTok means for the future of social media

Subscribe to the center for technology innovation newsletter, mishaela robison and mishaela robison former research assistant jack karsten jack karsten former senior research analyst, center for technology innovation - the brookings institution.

October 12, 2020

It has been an eventful few months for TikTok: The social media platform recently won an injunction against a nationwide ban while it negotiates a deal with Oracle and Walmart to satisfy President Trump’s executive orders demanding a sale to a U.S. company. With the November deadline for a deal upcoming, the shifting contours of the transaction and concerns over the app’s security will have important ramifications for future technology policy.

The TikTok app has consistently topped worldwide download charts and recently celebrated the best quarter of downloads in app history. Yet this very popularity fueled concerns about data security and potential foreign espionage from China, where TikTok’s current parent company ByteDance is located. Though some TikTok users have speculated that the executive orders have been in retaliation to the platform’s role in organizing opposition to Trump’s reelection campaign , the app has been under national security review since 2019 due to its rising influence in the U.S., which suggests several overlapping motivations.

Other social media platforms have benefitted from the pandemonium surrounding TikTok’s current legal challenges, lessening the focus on their own products and services and attracting TikTok users. But the perceived political motivation to ban TikTok based on its Chinese origins sets a damaging precedent for other social media platforms balancing global ambitions with the U.S.’s broader handling of foreign relations.

Ties to China

Prior to issuing his executive order, Trump stated that he did not mind if “a very American company buys [TikTok.]” His sentiments were rooted in the administration’s growing distrust of Chinese technology companies. TikTok had previously attempted to allay the president’s concerns by storing Americans’ data on U.S. soil, hiring an American CEO, and employing lobbyists in Washington. Further, TikTok’s founder chose to create separate apps for the Chinese and global markets so that users around the world could avoid censorship requirements from the Chinese Communist Party. Still, efforts to assure the U.S. government that TikTok would not give data to the Chinese government have not been sufficient enough to quell concerns over Chinese influence and interference through the app.

Despite Trump’s initial demand that TikTok be acquired by an American company, the current deal proposal still allows ByteDance an 80% ownership stake in the newly established entity, TikTok Global, with 20% ownership from potential buyers Oracle and Walmart. It also remains unclear if such a proposal will be enough to eliminate other lingering concerns about the social media giant. Several lawmakers, including Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO,) criticized prior deals for not sufficiently severing ties with China. Trump himself has expressed similar sentiment in the past by vowing not to sign off if ByteDance maintains any organizational control. For now, American companies appear likely to acquire a minority of the social media giant with Trump’s “blessing” in spite of the majority control left to a company which has previously censored anti-China content on TikTok.

Reflected in both the president’s executive orders and his business guidance is the absence of coherent policy around Chinese technology, leaving TikTok as a precedent for future actions. Ongoing negotiations between TikTok and other companies signal a need for a comprehensive strategy for dealing with Chinese-based technology firms operating in the U.S. In March, similar scrutiny lead to the sale of the gay dating app Grindr after the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) determined that Chinese ownership of the app was a national security risk, though the Committee did not publicly share the evidence underlying that decision. Comparatively, the U.S. government has raised few concerns about data protection on the popular Swedish-based music app Spotify, despite major privacy concerns arising in Sweden. As questions of Chinese-owned tech companies continue to emerge, the U.S. government needs much clearer policies going forward to avoid making decisions an ad hoc manner.

Algorithmic transparency

By many accounts, TikTok’s power comes from its algorithm , which tailors an infinite feed of videos to each individual user’s preferences. As a result, the average TikTok user spends more time on the platform than its competitors. Recent trade restrictions by China have highlighted the value that the country places on the development of powerful algorithms.

Artificial intelligence can be a double-edged sword for social media, providing potential for increased engagement while creating echo chambers, bias, and manipulation. In light of these concerns, TikTok pledged to share their algorithm with external experts, a move that came days before the House Antitrust Hearing confronted Big Tech CEOs for their lack of transparency. In a blog post announcing this decision, former CEO Kevin Mayer called on other social media companies to do the same, emphasizing TikTok’s commitment to accountability. Mayer vowed to use TikTok’s time in the spotlight to “drive deeper conversations around algorithms, transparency, and content moderation, and to develop stricter rules of the road.”

TikTok’s openness may set a new benchmark for other social media companies, challenging them to be more transparent about their algorithms or risk losing trust. Though experts have debated the degree to which algorithms should be made transparent, research from the Stanford Department of Communication found that users trust algorithms more when presented with at least some information on how they work. These factors point to a need for algorithmic transparency, and the urgency of policy to enforce it.

Privacy enhancements

When asked about a potential Microsoft acquisition, co-founder Bill Gates described “being big in the social media business” as “a poison chalice” due to questions of encryption and privacy. Similarly, implicit in concerns that China may have access to TikTok users’ data are questions about data security and privacy. TikTok has previously faced criticism—and a lawsuit —for failing to protect the data privacy of minors, resulting in heightened privacy measures that they have only partially implemented.

Though, as a viral TikTok video pointed out, Facebook currently tracks more user data than TikTok, despite the latter engaging in concerning several data acquisition tactics . Since the ban was announced, major employers such as Wells Fargo and the federal government , and the Biden campaign have prohibited their staff from using the app due to security concerns. If ByteDance retains any part of U.S. operations, they could still be required to send data to Chinese companies under the country’s national security law. In the past, critics have also accused Oracle of selling personal user data , which suggests a need for greater privacy regulation for all companies in the United States, regardless of national origin.

Vanessa Pappas, TikTok’s new global head, has said her primary focus will be the app’s creators and users . If that is the case, she must first address the security of their data and institute appropriate privacy mechanisms.

TikTok exemplifies the necessity for comprehensive policies regarding foreign tech companies. While the fate of the imminent deal remains ambiguous, the tech world will be watching to determine if the company’s partnership with Oracle and Walmart can ameliorate the concerns that prompted calls for its removal from app stores. Reflexive condemnation of Chinese-based technology companies without a systematic policy basis is likely to prove ineffective and confusing in the long run. The current policy ambiguity misses an opportunity to pursue greater transparency and accountability from all technology companies.

No matter the ultimate outcome, TikTok has left an indelible mark on the social media industry. The questions raised by recent action are not new and illuminate gaps in policy which concern the future of the entire tech sector.

Facebook is a general, unrestricted donor to the Brookings Institution. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions posted in this piece are solely those of the author and not influenced by any donation.

Related Content

Darrell M. West, Nicol Turner Lee, Tom Wheeler

September 17, 2020

Geoffrey Gertz

August 7, 2020

November 15, 2019

Cybersecurity Internet & Telecommunications Privacy

Governance Studies

Center for Technology Innovation

Kevin C. Desouza, Richard Watson, Yancong Xie

August 28, 2024

Isabella Panico Hernández, Nicol Turner Lee

August 22, 2024

The Brookings Institution, Washington DC

2:00 pm - 3:30 pm EDT

Find anything you save across the site in your account

The Case for Banning Children from Social Media

There are times when I wonder what it would take to separate my six-year-old daughter from her iPad. Like so many parents these days, my wife and I have ceded some of our child-raising duties to a device that, despite having multiple safeguards turned on, still has a terrifying proximity to all the worst things on the Internet. We set limits on it like a lot of other people do, and generally feel bad every time we see her with her nose buried in an episode of Pokemon or “ Is It Cake? ” (a game show in which contestants bake realistic cakes, and judges guess whether an object is cake or not). I feel bad because my kid is spending her days the same way I do: staring at a screen. But what I worry about more than anything is what will happen when she gets older, and her screens go from “Is It Cake?” to the chaos of social media.

Poll after poll shows that a lot of parents are worried about what their kids consume and how they communicate with one another on the Internet. Earlier this year, Vivek Murthy, the Surgeon General of the United States, said that he did not think children under the age of fourteen should have access to social media. Last month, the state of Utah passed two bills that address this concern, dramatically restricting kids’ access to social-media platforms. The new laws will require anyone under the age of eighteen to obtain parental permission to maintain or create accounts on any social-media site, and grant parents full access to their children’s accounts. There will also be a social-media curfew for minors, unless otherwise amended by their parents, and restrictions to make it more difficult for teens to send or receive messages from people outside of their existing networks. Additionally, any “addictive” features placed on these platforms would have to be removed from underage accounts. Details on how the state plans to enforce these policies are still hazy— most would involve the state fining or suing social-media companies —but there’s considerable support on both sides of the aisle for these kinds of restrictions . At the federal level, there is a bill floating around Congress called the Social Media Child Protection Act that proposes to do much of the same.

The civil-liberties implications of these restrictions are considerable and largely self-evident. The A.C.L.U.’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology project sent me a statement that said the Utah bill and many like it around the country would “restrict the ability of teenagers to explore and make up their own minds about everything from gender identity to safe sex to politics without parental knowledge or involvement.” Under the Utah law, an L.G.B.T.Q. child living in a household with disapproving parents might have fewer resources to find community and support because their parents would be able to look into their messages; children in abusive households would have a harder time using messaging platforms to seek help. Minors will also find it harder to access news. They will probably see fewer protests around the world and fewer videos that might inform them in one way or another, walling them off from online communities of people who care about the same things they do. They, in effect, will almost certainly be isolated from many of the ways people form political beliefs these days, especially those that fall outside of the mainstream.

The potential chilling effect of the Utah bill extends beyond children; its most galling civil-liberties concerns have implications for adults, too. Because Utah residents might have to verify their age using official government identification, adults without I.D.s may effectively be barred from creating social-media accounts as well. “Every adult will have to verify not just their age but their identity, because we don’t yet have a simple way of verifying your age without verifying your identity,” Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told me. “It’s like getting carded to use the Internet.” Without any cover of anonymity or privacy, adults in Utah may become much more hesitant to express their beliefs online or to even seek out sources of information that might, for whatever reason, seem unseemly or potentially toxic. They will be much less likely to comment on anything, really, because they understand that their real identities have been linked to their accounts.

These bills will likely face considerable constitutional challenges. Previous attempts to block minors from accessing Web sites via broad legislation, including the Child Online Protection Act, from 1998, have been struck down on First Amendment grounds. Since social-media companies will have a difficult time knowing whether a child is in the state of Utah, especially with the proliferation of easy-to-use V.P.N.s that can mask a user’s location, it will be nearly impossible for a company like Twitter or Facebook to perfectly comply with the law. A host of other concerns remain unanswered: Will adults not be able to create private or secondary “burner” accounts and have to solely rely on I.D.-verified access? Will the state block access to social-media companies that do not comply?

Supporters of the bills may point out that movie ratings, which, in many instances, bar minors from entering screenings of R-rated films, have been part of our society for decades. But the Classification and Rating Administration ( CARA )—the body responsible for ratings—is not part of the government, nor does the government have any real say in whether an unaccompanied minor can watch a film or not, regardless of its rating. That decision is made by private theatres that adhere to the CARA . The Utah bills mark something entirely different: the state telling private companies to effectively bar young people from engaging in speech.

How you feel about all this will likely come down to whether you believe that social-media platforms are addictive products—like cigarettes—marketed to kids or that they are vital and intractable parts of the national conversation. If they are just modern cigarettes, they can and should be regulated or even just outright banned for young people. But if they’re a vehicle for expression, then the government should do what it can to protect the free-speech rights of minors.

The difficulty, of course, is that these two visions of social media are not mutually exclusive in any way. Social media does seem uniquely harmful to young people, but it is also the way in which they express themselves and find friends and confidantes. Most people seem to agree that social media is bad for young people. They have read the studies about teen misery; they have witnessed some child or another being completely entranced by their phone. Most people also appear to agree that something should be done to protect kids from what sure seems like an addictive product. But almost none of those people really know what that something is, nor would they, presumably, be willing to curtail their own online consumption to help save the kids.

As such, the Utah bills could be seen as almost admirable—not for their actual specific actions, which are just too unconstitutional and logistically clunky to be taken seriously, but for the simple fact that they are trying to use the powers of government to address a societal problem. They are treating social-media platforms as if they were a harmful, addictive substance and are effectively arguing that it’s worth curtailing civil liberties for the betterment of society. In doing so, they have asked a provocative question about whether the government should distinguish between the vessel for speech from the speech acts that are performed within it. Sometime in the near future, I imagine a host of politicians will follow Utah’s lead and call for stricter regulation for kids.

President Biden has already made considerable gestures—although it should be said, not much more than gestures—at either revoking or reforming Section 230 , the current law that gives Internet companies a level of legal immunity against the things that are said on their platforms. A bipartisan push in the name of protecting the children and scaling back the power of social media would likely be politically popular, but would, in all likelihood, immediately be challenged in the courts. This February, the court heard arguments in Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh , and while neither case is expected to yield a sweeping decision on Section 230, both will likely signal how the justices feel, in general, about weighing speech demands against perceived liability. A repeat of the nineties, when concerned lawmakers tried to legislate online protections in the name of child safety but were ultimately struck down by the courts, seems well within the realm of possibility.

If we cannot legally restrict social-media companies from children without stomping all over the First Amendment and creating a nightmare for any adult who wants to log in to a site without submitting their government I.D.—and I really don’t think we can—it will be up to state and cultural institutions to put out as much anti-social-media messaging as possible, much like they did with smoking. But they will likely have to act without judicial support, which, when it came to cigarettes, allowed for a host of taxes and restrictions on Big Tobacco. Even then, it seems unlikely that messaging alone can work against the allure of social media, especially if adults never turn it down themselves. Parents, myself included, may just have to do the unthinkable and rip the screens out of children’s hands and our own. ♦

New Yorker Favorites

They thought that they’d found the perfect apartment. They weren’t alone .

The world’s oldest temple and the dawn of civilization .

What happened to the whale from “Free Willy.”

It was one of the oldest buildings left downtown. Why not try to save it ?

The religious right’s leading ghostwriter .

After high-school football stars were accused of rape, online vigilantes demanded that justice be served .

A comic strip by Alison Bechdel: the seven-minute semi-sadistic workout .

Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Should Kids Be Kept Off Social Media?

More from our inbox:.

• ‘Arguing Both Sides of the Law’ on Declassifying Documents
• Good Careers in the Restaurant Industry
• The Empty Society
• Caveat Emptor, Crypto Investors

To the Editor:

Re “ It Was a Mistake to Let Kids Onto Social Media Sites. Here’s What to Do Now ” (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, Aug. 5):

Yuval Levin argues that it’s a mistake to let kids onto social media sites. I would argue that it is more of a mistake to let adults onto social media sites. Aren’t they the ones who are supposed to be doing their jobs and making the world run? It’s no surprise the world is falling apart when these adults are glued to their phones all day.

In addition, most of the negative and bad content online is created by adults. It floods the internet, causing sadness, confusion and so much chaos. We kids just want to chat and make each other laugh. Why should we be the ones who have our fun taken away?

I think Mr. Levin and the rest of the grown-ups should get off their phones and tablets and get back to work.

Clay Kryst Los Angeles The writer is 16 years old.

Social media is definitely damaging for kids under a certain age, and many issues are definitely exacerbated on social media. However, what we need to do now is more complex than just keeping kids off social media.

Kids are on social media right now, whether people like it or not. As a teen, I am definitely “acutely aware” that social media has the potential to be very harmful. I am also “acutely aware” that if more teens were taught how to handle social media and the multitude of pressures that come with it (and could access mental health help easily if they needed it), the damage of social media would be lessened.

Focusing on future steps to keep young children off social media could potentially have an impact. More important, however, there must be urgent action to help the kids who are currently on social media (or will be soon). Everyone, no matter where you stand on this issue, should be pushing for increased education around social media pressures and how to manage them and initiatives that make mental health care more accessible for teens.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Instagram — Why Instagram is The Best Social Media

Why Instagram is The Best Social Media

• Categories: Instagram Social Media

About this sample

Words: 496 |

Updated: 28 November, 2023

Words: 496 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

• Longobardi, C., Settanni, M., Fabris, M. A., & Marengo, D. (2020). Follow or be followed: Exploring the links between Instagram popularity, social media addiction , cyber victimization, and subjective happiness in Italian adolescents. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0190740919314781 Children and youth services review, 113, 104955.
• Trifiro, B. (2018). Instagram use and its effect on well-being and self-esteem. (https://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/macomm/4/)
• Hwnag, H. S. (2019). Why social comparison on Instagram matters: Its impact on depression. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems (TIIS), 13(3), 1626-1638. (https://koreascience.kr/article/JAKO201914260133566.page)
• Woodley, A. (2018). How does Instagram impact on people's perceptions of their appearance?. Journal of Aesthetic Nursing, 7(2), 94-95. (https://www.magonlinelibrary.com/doi/abs/10.12968/joan.2018.7.2.94)
• Keyte, R., Mullis, L., Egan, H., Hussain, M., Cook, A., & Mantzios, M. (2021). Self-compassion and instagram use is explained by the relation to anxiety, depression, and stress. Journal of technology in behavioral science, 6, 436-441. (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41347-020-00186-z)

Video Version

Should follow an “upside down” triangle format, meaning, the writer should start off broad and introduce the text and author or topic being discussed, and then get more specific to the thesis statement.

Provides a foundational overview, outlining the historical context and introducing key information that will be further explored in the essay, setting the stage for the argument to follow.

Cornerstone of the essay, presenting the central argument that will be elaborated upon and supported with evidence and analysis throughout the rest of the paper.

The topic sentence serves as the main point or focus of a paragraph in an essay, summarizing the key idea that will be discussed in that paragraph.

The body of each paragraph builds an argument in support of the topic sentence, citing information from sources as evidence.

After each piece of evidence is provided, the author should explain HOW and WHY the evidence supports the claim.

Should follow a right side up triangle format, meaning, specifics should be mentioned first such as restating the thesis, and then get more broad about the topic at hand. Lastly, leave the reader with something to think about and ponder once they are done reading.

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1166 words

3 pages / 1345 words

1 pages / 1049 words

7 pages / 3000 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Instagram

Bennett, S. (2014). The selfie. Photography and Culture, 7(1), 75-92.Carrotte, E. R., Vella, A. M., Lim, M. S., & Hellard, M. E. (2015). “Fitspiration” on social media: A content analysis of gendered images. Journal of Medical [...]

Instagram has swiftly evolved from a mere photo-sharing application to a significant influencer in modern society. Its influence pervades multiple aspects of life, including social interactions, mental health, and commercial [...]

Instagram is a world-wide online platform or application in which people can share photos, videos, stories, and messages. It was created in October 2010 by Kevin Systrom and then sold to Facebook in 2012 for $1 billion (Aslam, [...]

Definition of digital/social media Introduction to the importance of digital marketing in brand communication Mention of a survey conducted to assess the current situation in Bangladesh Explanation of digital [...]

When reading a book as brilliant as The Brother’s Karamazov, one wonders where Dostoevsky’s inspiration came from. According to Sigmund Freud, the novel must not be studied as a fiction but as a science, that being [...]

Propaganda was easily understandable and accessible being just another advertising tool. If propaganda was not available, then many countries would have had difficulties gathering funds and supplies, getting more assistance and [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

* Neumann University strives to follow in the footsteps of Saint Francis of Assisi and care for and revere all creation. The NeuPress sustainability section offers students a space to air their concerns about the environment.

Should TikTok be Banned?

TikTok is one of the biggest social media platforms in the world right now, reaching and influencing millions of users unlike anything else the world has ever seen before. With over 1 billion monthly users, TikTok is the 4th most used social media platform. With its numbers only rising, reaching close to Instagram's 1.4 billion monthly viewers, TikTok is beginning to create a new realm of media. 

Recently, lawmakers in several countries across the world, including the United States, have escalated efforts to ban access to TikTok, which is owned by a Chinese company called ByteDance. 

In the past year, several countries have already instituted bans on government officials using the app on government devices. In addition, some universities have banned the app from being used on school networks, including schools like Auburn, and Texas Tech among others. 

In the past few months, the house passed legislation that would ban TikTok in the United States if ByteDance doesn’t sell its stake of ownership off the app within a year.  

These increased prohibitions on the app have brought the debate to the forefront of media, bringing into question whether TikTok should be banned. 

Those in favor of banning TikTok are concerned that ByteDance put sensitive user data, including location data, purchase data, and other factors that go into TikTok’s algorithm, into the hands of the Chinese government. Those in favor of the ban say this is a national security threat. 

Those who want the ban also point to laws that allow the Chinese government to demand data from Chinese companies and citizens for intelligence-gathering operations.  

They are also concerned about the possibility that the Chinese Government is using TikTok to spread misinformation, propaganda, and influence viewpoints, opinions, and elections within America.  

Those against TikTok also point to potential harmful effects. Data from several studies including those from Microsoft and Nature Communications show that TikTok negatively affects the attention spans of users. 

Data from these studies showed that users between the ages of 11-26 have been linked to decreased attention spans when using the app for more than 90 minutes (about 1 and a half hours) a day. 

Those against banning TikTok believe that the ban would go against our First Amendment right to the freedom of speech. They believe that politicians are in favor of banning the app because they cannot censor content on TikTok. 

Users of the app appreciate the ability to freely communicate about political topics without being censored, as is not the case on apps such as Instagram, or X (formerly known as Twitter), which are notorious for their fact checkers and censorship.  

It is also believed that banning TikTok is a ploy by Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, to eliminate competition and maximize profit. 

Last year, the Washington Post reported that Meta hired a GOP consulting firm to swing opinions against TikTok, to draw attention away from themselves. 

Lastly, those in favor of keeping TikTok alive believe that the data being collected by TikTok is also being collected by other tech companies, such as Apple, Samsung, and Meta, so it is unfair to put the sole blame on one app or developer.  

So, what do you think, should TikTok be banned? 

John Altomare

• Knightflix Radio: Get Out
• Sports Media Playbook Podcast Ep 4
• The Modern Reconquista
• Sports Media Playbook Podcast Ep 3

Caitlin Clark: Worth the Hype?

Caitlin Clark, star basketball player for the University of Iowa Hawkeyes, has been unstoppable on...

Living Black History

Four students interviewed Regina Paige Garrettson, a member of the university’s dining hall staff,...

Political Science students lobby at state capitol

On Tuesday, April 9, over 100 students from private schools across Pennsylvania took a trip to...

Annual Athletic Banquet Honors Student-Athletes' Hard Work, Dedication

To conclude Division III week, Neumann University hosted its annual athletics banquet on April 18th...

Should Tiktok be banned?

The following editorial was originally published in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser on Sunday, June 4, 2023 as part of the “Raise Your Hand” column in the Insight section.

The app is highly addictive, affecting social development and mental health

By Rihanna Joaquin, Kealakehe High School, c/o 2026 (left)

TikTok has become one of the world’s most popular apps. From adults to young children, it seems that almost everybody has used the app, or is at least aware of its influence. While the app can be used in good and innocent ways, its many negative impacts have been largely overlooked. TikTok can be an addictive app and can seriously damage the mental well-being of its users — particularly young people. TikTok should be banned because it is harming youth and poses a significant national security threat.

First, TikTok should be banned because it is infecting the impressionable minds of young people. TikTok’s algorithm makes it highly addictive, particularly for youth who spend hours of their day scrolling on the app. Many people have developed serious screen-time addictions that have impacted their social development and mental health.

Additionally, there are many dangerous “trends” or “challenges” that have originated on the platform. Young people see short video trends posted by their favorite “influencers,” and are influenced to try out these trends for themselves. While many challenges are relatively harmless, some are risky and dangerous. For example, there are trends and dances that require flexibility and coordination. Some people do not have these talents but are eager to try them out anyway. Many young people who have tried these trends have ended up hurting themselves, sometimes even lethally.

TikTok should be banned because it is infecting the minds of youth, poses a national security concern, and creates the potential for theft of sensitive personal information.

— Rihanna Joaquin

Another not-so-innocent example is the trend of stealing things from public. While some of these trends have encouraged the theft of public signs or toilets, other more serious examples of the TikTok theft trend include vehicles. Theft is a serious crime and should not be promoted as a fun trend on social media. These sorts of trends negatively impact the mental and even physical well-being of young people, as well as the community around them.

In addition, TikTok should be banned because it is a national security threat. The Chinese Communist Party could have unlimited access to sensitive data the company collects from its American users. As a Chinese company, it is subject to Chinese national security laws that require them to turn over data to Chinese authorities on request. The Chinese government can spy on American users and gain access to their sensitive information including names, phone numbers, location data, financial information, or even browsing history. Additionally, the Chinese government can use the app to spread propaganda to its U.S. user base. This could lead to misinformation efforts and rumors that undermine American national security. Especially considering the growing geopolitical tensions of the moment, it is imperative that TikTok be banned to avoid further threats to the U.S.

In conclusion, TikTok should be banned because it is infecting the minds of youth, poses a national security concern, and creates the potential for theft of sensitive personal information. TikTok is not a necessity. There are other available avenues for entertainment that are less addictive and do not pose a serious national security threat. In order to mitigate these dangerous consequences, people should avoid using the app altogether and seriously consider what they are willing to trade off for personal entertainment.

Blatant censorship would harm democratic fabric of our society

By Brayden Jadulang , Kealakehe High School, c/o 2026 (right)

In the seventh grade, I downloaded TikTok out of boredom. I remember the wave of stagnation and isolation that followed the pandemic’s stay at-home order. Little did I know that the app would be so much more than an entertainment platform. Some claim that TikTok should be banned because of alleged national security concerns and because it is not absolutely essential. However, such a ban would be a flagrant act of government censorship and a violation of the First Amendment. Given the consequences of censorship, I believe that TikTok should not be banned. Undeniably, banning TikTok is a violation of the First Amendment. Recently, TikTok has metamorphosed from an entertainment platform to an information platform that resembles a search engine or a publisher. For example, a petition to stop the Willow Project, a proposed development project in Northern Alaska, gained steam on TikTok. The app helped the petition to garner an astounding 4 million signatures, with the number still climbing. TikTok has created a bridge between Gen Z and real-world problems — something that mainstream news outlets have been unsuccessful at accomplishing. It is essential for young people to be conscious of world issues and to have a meaningful say in enacting change. Additionally, a whopping 300 million people, or 1 out of every 3 Americans, use TikTok. Evidently, banning TikTok would significantly hinder the freedom of speech and expression of a large swath of Americans.

Moreover, banning TikTok would be an act of blatant censorship. History and literature have taught us that censorship signifies the start of a Machiavellian pipeline. Censorship leads to a lack of information, which could foster apathy, a lack of individualism, and excessive conformism. In other words, censorship creates the perfect breeding ground for authoritarianism. Many political powers have used this tactic to their advantage; some have even weaponized it. For example, the Taliban has banned TikTok to implicitly hinder Pakistani women, a large threat to their power, from seeing Western values and using them as a point of reference to live by.

Censorship leads to a lack of information, which could foster apathy, a lack of individualism, and excessive conformism.

— Brayden Jadulang

Additionally, we must not be myopic and must consider how such a ban could affect our future. In the dystopian novel “1984,” George Orwell depicts a futuristic totalitarian society built upon high surveillance and the censorship of intimacy. Likewise, the novel “Fahrenheit 451” portrays a futuristic society where the censorship of books and literature are key features. Both novels act as cautionary tales, telling a truth that we must not ignore.

Banning TikTok would be blatant censorship and would threaten the democratic fabric of our society. Given the millions of Americans who utilize the platform to communicate and advocate, along with the dangers of censorship that history and literature have warned us about, TikTok should not be banned.

Related Articles

Rising from the ashes: rebuilding lahaina.

Gear Up, Summer Fun Needs Your Help

Programs like Summer Fun are more important now than ever in light of the COVID pandemic, during which in-person opportunities for children were severely limited. The diverse programming that Summer Fun offers can aid in rebuilding children’s physical endurance and strength lost during extended periods at home. Additionally, it provides opportunities for socialization and developing social cues — skills that were strained during the pandemic when children primarily interacted through screens.

Lower America's Legal Voting age to 16

Lowering the voting age to 16 will help to make voting a habit for young people. With more familiarity at a younger age, individuals will be more inclined to vote in future elections, improving overall voter turnout. Additionally, it communicates the importance of civic engagement and fosters active participation in democracy.

Toxic Masculinity

"According to the Oxford English Dictionary, “toxic masculinity” is defined as a set of attitudes and ways of behaving stereotypically associated with or expected of men, regarded as having a negative impact on men and society as a whole. Some individuals on the extreme end have appropriated the term to express their disdain for men, twisting the true meaning of the term."

Get the latest updates on how we create Hawaii’s next chapter

Why TikTok should not be banned essay?

Why TikTok Should Not Be Banned: An Argument for Social Media Freedom

The debate surrounding the ban of TikTok, a popular social media platform, has been gaining momentum in recent times. With concerns about data privacy, cyberbullying, and mental health, many experts and governments are calling for the app to be banned. However, this article will argue that TikTok should not be banned, and instead, we should focus on educating users about responsible social media use.

Data Privacy Concerns: A Misguided Reason for Ban

One of the primary reasons cited for banning TikTok is its data privacy concerns. It is true that the app collects user data, including location information, contacts, and browsing history. However, this is not unique to TikTok. Most social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, collect similar data. What’s more, TikTok’s data collection practices are transparent and comply with existing data protection regulations .

Table: Comparison of Data Collection Practices among Popular Social Media Platforms

As seen in the table above, TikTok is the only platform that provides full transparency about its data collection practices. This transparency is crucial in ensuring that users are aware of what data is being collected and how it is being used.

Cyberbullying: A Social Issue, Not a Platform Problem

Another reason cited for banning TikTok is cyberbullying. It is true that cyberbullying is a serious issue, but it is not unique to TikTok. Cyberbullying is a social issue that requires a comprehensive approach, including education, awareness, and community engagement . Banning TikTok or any other platform will not solve the problem, but rather drive it underground.

Mental Health Concerns: A Red Herring

Mental health concerns are also often cited as a reason for banning TikTok. However, this is a red herring . While social media use can have negative effects on mental health, it is not unique to TikTok. In fact, many mental health experts agree that social media use is just one of many factors that can affect mental health. What’s more, TikTok has implemented features to promote mental health, such as screen time tracking and parental controls .

Educating Users, Not Banning Platforms

Rather than banning TikTok or any other platform, we should focus on educating users about responsible social media use. This includes:

• Setting boundaries : Setting limits on screen time and ensuring that social media use does not interfere with other aspects of life. • Monitoring content : Parents and caregivers should monitor the content their children are exposed to and set boundaries around what is appropriate. • Reporting incidents : Users should report incidents of cyberbullying or other harmful behavior to the platform or authorities.

In conclusion, banning TikTok or any other social media platform is not the solution to the problems we face. Instead, we should focus on educating users about responsible social media use and promoting digital literacy. TikTok should not be banned, but rather be used as a tool to promote creativity, self-expression, and social connection . By promoting a balanced and informed approach to social media use, we can ensure that these platforms are used in a way that benefits society, rather than harms it.

Recommendations

• Educate users about responsible social media use, including setting boundaries, monitoring content, and reporting incidents.
• Promote digital literacy and critical thinking skills to help users make informed decisions about their online activities.
• Encourage social media platforms to implement features that promote responsible use, such as screen time tracking and parental controls.
• Develop policies and regulations that balance individual freedoms with social responsibility.

By taking a proactive and informed approach to social media use, we can ensure that platforms like TikTok are used in a way that benefits society, rather than harms it.

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Italy calls for early review of EU combustion engine ban

• Medium Text

Sign up here.

Reporting by Elvira Pollina, editing by Lisa Jucca

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Spanish autos, pork in Beijing's sights with PM Sanchez in China

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez is expected to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping on Monday, with the EU and China on the verge of a trade war and Beijing preparing to hit back at Spanish automobiles and pork if Brussels imposes tariffs on its EVs.