DN Debate. "Who do you think you are saving with the social media ban?"

The issue of banning social media for young people has been pursued for a long time. Recently, the European Commission presented its plans to ban social media for young people under the age of 13. We also see how a similar proposal is being prepared in Sweden: an investigation that suggests that young people under the age of 15 should not be allowed to use social media while logged in. The purpose is to protect young people from, among other things, harmful content and bullying.

In the search for a safer internet, we at Ung Media are increasingly concerned about how the consideration of young people's right to their place in the democratic space is repeatedly lacking. In practice, these proposals mean that young people's freedom of expression and information and participation in the public space are restricted, even though these rights are legislated in Sweden according to articles 12, 13, 15 and 17 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. We at Ung Media therefore set the following three requirements to guarantee young people's fundamental right to be seen and take place in the public conversation:

A serious risk of millions of young people missing out on their single greatest tool to exercise their basic democratic rights.

1. Do not take away young people's right to express themselves, receive information and participate in the social debate.

Young people under the age of 15 make up approximately 1.9 million of the total population. That's about as many as everyone in Stockholm, Malmö and Gothenburg. Imagine that everyone in those cities would suddenly be shut out from taking part in journalism, getting involved in the social debate and having their voice heard in one of the biggest social arenas.

It would be like banning them from reading the newspaper, writing submissions and participating in the public space during the heyday of the paper newspaper. The difference is that the public space today has moved from the paper newspaper to social media.

The prevailing perception that social media only consists of entertainment and "brain rot" is wrong. For young people, social media is also the single largest source of information and news, according to a report from the Internet Foundation. There is thus a serious risk that millions of young people will miss out on their single greatest tool for exercising their basic democratic rights.

2. Ensure young people's right to organization and community.

Social media is not only an unsafe place for young people. It is a place for young people to organize themselves and find connections despite different geographical, economic and social conditions. Those who cannot find others with similar experiences in, for example, their school or their sports team can find community in various forums on social media.

A very clear example of this is young LGBTQI people. For a young LGBTQI person growing up in an environment where closeness to others is limited, social media can act as a bridge to community, context and inclusion. By extension, this means that they get a chance to organize and get involved in issues concerning their rights.

Limiting social media could thus lead to many young people losing one of their main forums for context and community. A society that truly wants to protect the rights of young people must take this fact into account and realize that social media, for some, is the only context in which they feel at home.

Another survey shows that 14 percent feel less safe on social media as a result of the ban

3. Aim the legislation at the companies, not at the young people and the parents.

Last year, Australia became the first country in the world to ban social media for under-16s. A study that followed Australian youth after the implementation of the ban found that over 85 percent of youth still used social media. Another survey shows that 14 percent feel less safe on social media as a result of the ban.

These studies show a very worrying development. Young people are thus still allowed to do what the ban tries to prevent, while it also leads to some young people feeling less safe. The harmful content and the dangerous algorithms are thus allowed to continue, albeit with a false sense of security. The Swedish investigation would suggest that young people still get access to the content by being logged out, which would probably mean that in practice the platforms make it easier to take part in content when logged out.

We believe that the legislation should put more effort into changing the algorithms and the content than targeting the young people and the parents. How is it reasonable that the solution to the problem created by the design of social media should be to limit access to it by millions of young people?

We, like many others, want to ensure that all young people feel safe on social media. But that should not mean a limitation of young people's voice in society. Therefore, we set the three requirements above. With them, we want to ensure that young people experience a safe, inclusive arena on social media that has room for their voice.

Read more articles from DN Debatt:

The author Amanda Hellberg: "When a book loan becomes a report of concern, I really get scared of the dark"