Not all screen time is equal: Wrestling with a YouTube ban for kids

Early on in my parenting journey a girlfriend sent a post that said, “To say all screen time is the same is like saying all paper time is the same.” Or like saying that reading this masthead is the same quality of paper time as reading New Idea or opening a utility bill, or reading philosophy or folding origami.

Not all “paper time”is equal.

It is obvious how ridiculous that argument is. Surely an 11-year-old reading The Day My Butt Exploded is not the same quality of paper time as reading Harry Potter. It is the same for screen time. Not all screen time is equal.

Psychologists and parenting experts have used analogies galore to explain this to parents, schools and governments. Like the nutritional pyramid, Jocelyn Brewer refers to “Digital Nutrition” with the “good screen time” at the bottom, where wholegrains are and the “sometimes screen time” at the top with lollies and chocolate.

While YouTube does have some educational videos and helpful “instructionals”, it also has a lot of toxic video content. I’m talking about misogynistic content, violent content and young people doing really stupid stuff that our kids then try to replicate, and I mean more stupid than the Mentos in the Diet Coke bottle.

I am sceptical about the social media ban for under-16s, not because I am a great fan of social media for kids, but because I’m not confident it will work. If kids under 16 have figured out how to bypass Lime Bike rentals, you don’t think they’ll figure out how to use social media?

But if we are moving forward with a social media ban, and it looks like we are, then there are some things that will make it work. The first is Australian parents getting behind it. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the ban was designed so parents could say to their children social media is “against the law”. That only works if we as parents don’t succumb to the wiles of our children. Don’t budge if Jonny or Susie are using it. Hold the line.

Currently, YouTube has been exempted from the ban. But the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, wants to change that.

Frankly, it would be farcical to ban social media but allow YouTube for under-16s. While it doesn’t have the “social” elements of other sites, it has the same dangerous content and misinformation. It would be like banning fast food but keeping McDonalds. To say that YouTube is somehow a better use of screen time than other social media apps such as Snapchat, TikTok or Instagram is nuts. So good on Inman Grant for pointing that out.

Even if the ban takes place, parents are still at liberty to watch appropriate content on YouTube in the company of their children. So what screen time are we allowed to partake in with our kids and teens without being deemed terrible parents?

It’s a tricky question, but in my view, and there’s evidence to support it, that anything experienced together is good. That can include watching TV shows and movies together as a family (we are currently watching Gilmore Girls and rewatching the Harry Potter movies). Heck, it can even include educational videos on YouTube such as TED talks, Crash Course History videos and great recipes – so long as you’re controlling it and it’s on your grown-up account. Games can be good – my daughter constantly beats me at The New York Times Spelling Bee game.

For social media sites like YouTube and TikTok, there is very little curation of what is uploaded. Credit: Reuters

Kids communicating with friends is good, but that doesn’t have to happen over social media. Group chats such as iMessage and WhatsApp work fine. In fact, with all the debate happening over the impacts of social media on Gen Z and Gen Alpha, maybe learning how to use a telephone the old-fashioned way could be good for them.

Algorithmic viewing can be dangerous, but with platforms such as Netflix and Disney+, the curation of that content is a protective factor. For social media sites like YouTube and TikTok, there is very little curation of what is uploaded, which means that according to a study done by Dublin City University, about 76 per cent of content on TikTok is deemed “toxic”, as is 78 per cent of content on YouTube shorts. That’s not the equivalent of some lolly snakes on the nutritional pyramid; it’s the same as downing turpentine.

I maintain that this social media ban will be difficult to enforce, and that the front line will not be on the house of parliament but all of our kitchen tables, but unless the government is going to do it properly and include YouTube, it seems like a farce before it has even begun.

Daisy Turnbull is a teacher and the author of 50 Risks To Take With Your Kids and 50 Questions to Ask Your Teens.