Table of Contents
Jack Watson
Jack Watson is a 17-year-old schoolboy studying for his A-levels.
Sir Keir Starmer has vowed to ban social media for under-16s and will make further announcements within the next week. The government has also unveiled plans to extend the age restrictions to 17-year-olds or even 18-year-olds. This process began in January after 61 Labour MPs called on the prime minister to impose a ban on social media for under-16s and a rebellion threatened in the Lords. Members of the party claim that successive governments have ‘failed’ to protect young children on social media platforms and have persuaded Starmer to take urgent action. This comes amid concerns from families who have lost their teenage children to suicide linked to social media, who’ve formed an effective lobby group.
As a 17-year-old social media user, this feels absurd and insulting. I have benefited from social media, and while I may have paid the price in terms of social exclusion because of my right-wing political views, an outright ban would be a hindrance to me rather than a help. I have grown up with social media, and my life has been heavily influenced by it. In addition, approximately 95–99 per cent of teenagers in the UK use social media, meaning millions of teenage lives have been shaped by it. The government wants to snatch this away.
There are many positives to social media. As an avid reader of the news, I rely on social media to keep me updated and informed about what’s happening around the world. As newspaper readership dwindles, with 80 per cent of teenagers using online platforms or social media as their primary source of news, these platforms are an essential resource, particularly as the government wants to lower the voting age to 16. Yes, people must be careful about what they read, as some of it will be propaganda shaped by certain algorithms – but even the main newspapers have their own social media-friendly platforms now, which are more accessible and reliable for teenagers my age.
Moreover, social media is a platform to voice political opinions and directly contact local MPs and public figures. Sites such as X are excellent for debating high-profile people, and it’s easier for these figures to see your posts than it is via email. I have greatly benefited from this when publishing articles and tagging prominent individuals. Many have responded, which has helped me gain attention from people well placed in the journalism world. Only recently I wrote a review of Comedy Unleashed and after posting about it, the comedians – including Andrew Doyle – got in touch, inviting me to be a guest at their next gig in Leeds.
Social media is also the primary means of keeping in touch with peers and friends, especially those who do not live nearby. Emailing and letters are outdated now, and without social media there would be few other ways to contact people. I have family who have moved across the Atlantic, and these platforms are the main way of staying in touch. Can you imagine what would happen if teenagers lost contact with their friends and family? It would be deeply damaging.
Admittedly, I’ve paid a price for using social media. Since I began posting my articles publicly, it has inevitably led to peers and teachers reading them – and this has caused complications. As a conservative writer, I’ve experienced some pushback from my left-leaning classmates. For example, I posted about the tragic shooting of Charlie Kirk last year, saying he didn’t deserve to be killed for his political opinions, and criticised those on the left for celebrating his death. I had people insisting I take the post down, and some were utterly aghast. I instantly had a label on my back as a Nazi or fascist.
People have also managed to access articles I’ve published on personal social media accounts. At my secondary school, peers spread negative comments about me and mock me for what I write. I’ve also had teachers telling me not to write about certain topics and to take my articles down.
But enduring these labels and this backlash is just part of the cost we pay for being on social media – and it’s outweighed by the benefits. I would rather have access to social media and face these consequences than see it banned altogether. Starmer has held recent meetings with campaigners and bereaved families and has vowed to act, claiming clear action must be a “game changer”. But the government will be making a mistake by trying to ban people my age from platforms like Instagram and Snapchat. We’re big boys, prime minister. We can navigate the perils of the online world without your help.
This article was originally published by the Daily Sceptic.
