英国明年起禁止16岁以下儿童使用社交媒体

She has a new book out of users, how big tech took control and how to fight back. She writes the system is not designed to ask whether something is good for a child, only whether it keeps the child there. Duration is revenue. Escalation is efficiency. More is the business model. And she joins us. Now let let's start with that. We've seen this roiling debate here in The US, debate taking place in The UK, other countries as well about what role the government could play.

How how do you see the government role here versus the the role that we as consumers of this technology, users of this technology, and the company should be doing themselves? Well, good morning. I think I think you raised the most important, issue here, which is we've all got a role to play. And I think if you if you think about the way that the product is designed to addict, to keep attention, irrespective of whether that is good for the consumer or not, that's the bit that the government that's the role the government has to play.

Parents obviously have a role to play. It is an attention economy. Our attention is what keeps it going. So we could make different choices about that. But I think that that what the book really shows you is the asymmetry of power between the relative parties. So on the one hand, you've got a kid alone in their bedroom, and on the other hand, you've got the deep pockets of Silicon Valley with all the behavioral psychologists, all the lobbying money in the world, and like a cat flap into the White House and Downing Street, and all the power that that brings them.

The other issue it seems to me is, you know, this is a ban for kids 16. Kids 16 are better at their phones and technology than a lot of us old folks. I mean, seems to me like there are lots of workarounds. This is hard to implement. And I, you know, I don't have kids, but I know my friends who do talk about they ban phones and their kids still somehow have Instagram accounts. They they don't let them go to Sephora, and they're asking them about all these products that they're seeing online.

How do you enforce this, or is it just the fact that it exists kind of changes the conversation, especially with companies and advertisers trying to target kids through these mediums? I I think there's two parts to that. The first part is that, actually, the way that the law will be enforced will be the tech companies have to keep the kids off. So at a certain point, they have a responsibility. It's not just whether the kids get around it or whether the parents prevent them, but the but the tech companies themselves will be fined, will be stopped, will have business disruption and responsibilities.

So I think that's one part of it. I think the other part, which you sort of allude to in your question, is this cultural thing. You know, I probably and maybe even you when you were a kid, you know, went into a bar before the age you were supposed to, but you know Never. I would never have done something like that. I am a respectable human and journalist. Okay. So but but childhood is a time of transgression, but it's important to know you're transgressing.

And we have given a a generation of children a a period of time where we've said, oh, this is really normal to see pornography, to be pushed pornography self harm, you know, targeted with advertising, being approached by strangers. That is a cultural norm. The adult world says it's absolutely fine, so go do it. Now I think that the ban and and I think the ban is a bit of a crude term, by the way, because it's actually, you know, the devil as ever is always in the detail.

But if you're saying you cannot serve a child if you're introducing them to strangers, if you're sending them inappropriate content, if you're addicting them through the night, I go bring it on. Can I ask you lastly here in the limited time that we have as we watch all these breaking news events unfold, how you're thinking about AI and the proliferation of these AI chatbots and just the way in which children are Yeah?

Now having to enter a world in which that that is something with which they can interact? So that is the frontier of this battle. I've been doing this for about fifteen years. The book shows some of the some of the victories and some of the pushback that we've had, but we really are at big tech's tobacco moment here because we're beginning to see court cases not saying whether this is personal choice, but saying who knew what when, and is it designed to be fit for human consumption.

And that is the moment we're in, and AI comes just at that moment. And I think you will see much faster, moves to look at the sycophancy, the addiction, and the age gating of chatbots. We are seeing some very dangerous information being funneled to children and and adults, I might say. And, and I think that that we have to have a look and make some choices and say what kind of society we want. At the moment, it looks like five companies are gonna be in charge of everything.

And one of the things that I would say to you is it's not whether we regulate or don't. It's whether society democracy decides to regulate or we live by the terms and conditions of big tech.