Unlikely social-media law a scroll in right direction - Editorial

Actor Hugh Grant has recently despaired over children's social media habits - and slammed the lack of enforcement in the UK. Photo / Getty

Editorial

• Actor Hugh Grant has fired a broadside at UK authorities’ stance on social-media rules for children.
• A National Party member’s bill strives to ban Kiwi under-16s from social media.
• Act’s David Seymour is sceptical of its enforcement practicalities.

Hollywood A-lister Hugh Grant has emerged as a timely endorsement for an unlikely National Party member’s bill to ban under-16s from social media.

Whilst not talking directly to the Social Media Age-Appropriate Users Bill pushed last month by Tukituki MP Catherine Wedd, the father-of-five made headlines at a school in west London recently, where he slammed UK education authorities for indulging pupils’ screen addictions.

The Four Weddings and a Funeral star described himself as “another angry parent fighting the eternal, exhausting and depressive battle with children who only want to be on a screen”.

While the actor’s lament is nothing new, it’s a sentiment increasing in volume on these shores.

Since Wedd’s plan was announced, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon endorsed it, Labour’s Chris Hipkins came out “broadly supportive”, NZ First’s Winston Peters gave a thumbs up and Act’s David Seymour stood sceptical of its enforcement practicalities.

Some have claimed it proposes to throw babies out with the bathwater.

Yet surprisingly, given its audacity, there’s been scarce resistance to the bill.

This suggests a rising revulsion at our children’s addiction to the anaesthetic of a screen.

Wedd claimed the move would mirror a 2024 approach in Australia. Other jurisdictions were also taking action, she said. “Texas recently passed legislation which bans under-18s from social media use, and the UK, the EU and Canada all have similar work in train.”

A “biscuit tin” member’s bill is effectively a ceremonial lottery with unfavourable odds of being drawn.

But similarly to last year’s cellphone ban in schools, the prospect has buoyed many parents who take comfort in the idea that both school and state are backing a struggle they’re fighting to police at home.

Those with teenagers know there’s a heavy enforcement cost with imposing social-media limits on our kids; it’s the stuff of endless argument.

The scourge that insidiously entered homes has left many feeling they’ve let their guard (and kids) down.

Social media undoubtedly has virtues - but it comes with a hefty trade-off.

Because while the bill is primarily about curbing “bullying, inappropriate content and social media addiction”, it’s more than that.

Social media isn’t just perilous in its own right, its wider downfall is that it precludes other things that under-16s should be doing.

That is, actual relationships and human interfacing.

Sadly, most, if left to their own devices, prefer the escape of blue light. This search for otherness is, of course, a very human pursuit, and certainly not confined to adolescents.

But such arid disengagement was once the opposite of what we deemed healthy in under-16s.

Sign up to the Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.