Tim Blair: Why Harry has it royally wrong on social media dangers

Barring social media for kids ‘creates all sort of problems’ says Prince Harry. No, it doesn’t. Removing something that is addictive is a positive step. Recovering junkies know this so why doesn’t he, writes Tim Blair.

Prince Harry probably isn’t the best source in the world to offer views on family unity.

After all, his own family features more historical divisions and feuds than a typical Labor government – and Harry himself is one of the more prominent dividers, along with his wife Meghan.

Yet Harry’s own issues haven’t stopped him from rejecting, on family unity grounds, social media bans for children – such as those soon to be introduced in Australia.

Using a process of logic that is apparently not available to commoners, Harry reckons social media bans for kids make no sense and will cause family and schoolyard disputes.

Speaking at a New York conference of political and business bigwigs, Harry had this to say: “When parents ban children from social media, it causes a massive falling out and the child could be bullied by classmates for not having it.”

Prince Harry is opposed to social media bans for kids. Picture: Getty

Even for Harry, this is an extraordinarily ill-considered appraisal of social media concerns as they apply to kids.

By Harry’s reasoning, parents should avoid banning anything that might possibly cause a falling-out between themselves and their children.

A ban on tattoos, then, would be out. Or a ban on piercings. Or smoking. Or vaping. Or drinking.

As for Harry’s fear of children being bullied by classmates if they don’t have social media access, he very much seems to be missing the larger point.

As ban on social media for children would contract, rather than expand, opportunities for bullying and abuse.

Yes, there will always be schoolyard and playground misbehaviour. That misbehaviour can, occasionally and very regrettably, grow from standard teasing to painful torment.

But even then, such bullying is contained to the schoolyard and other physical venues. It doesn’t have a global footprint. It isn’t accessible on every phone and tablet throughout the planet. It won’t come up on a search of victims’ names.

Parents should avoid banning anything that might possibly cause a falling-out between themselves and their children, says Harry pictured here with wife Meghan.

“(Social media has) already been intentionally created to be addictive,” Harry continued, so banning it or removing it “creates all sort of problems”.

No, it doesn’t. Removing something that is addictive is generally a positive step. Recovering junkies know this, so why doesn’t Prince Harry?

The Duke of Sussex then offered to meet with social media executives and shareholders in a bid to solve the social media dilemma.

“I would welcome the chance to sit down with the shareholders,” Harry told the conference, “because their shareholders are the ones that really are in control.”

Given the remarkable lack of unifying success arising from his meetings with King Charles and Prince William, perhaps Harry should withdraw this kind offer.

Harry’s best line was his confirmation that he personally has no social media accounts.

He’s banned himself.

Good move. Now extend it to all the other children.