More than 10 states in the US have sued a giant social media platform accusing it of helping to drive a mental health crisis among teenagers. A group of attorneys general from across the country claim that the company – which called the lawsuit “disappointing” and considers many of the claims as “inaccurate and misleading” – uses addictive characteristics to hook children to the app and that it has intentionally misled the public about the safety of prolonged use.

Meanwhile, Australia is planning to set a minimum age limit for children to use certain social media platforms, citing concerns about mental and physical health.

The exact limitation age has yet to be revealed by the Australian government but observers say it appears likely to be between 14 and 16, with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese favouring the upper level in such an age range.

Describing social media usage among children as a “scourge”, the prime minister wants children to have “real experiences with real people”.

The issue sparked a deluge of reactions. They include people saying that the ban should have been introduced years ago because the damage has already been done. They also include others who admit that social media is undeniably harmful, especially for minors but, on the other hand, they are not comfortable with governments stepping in and telling people what they can and cannot do online. Moreover, digital rights advocates are warning the measure could drive dangerous online activity underground.

The measure definitely presents various aspects that need to be addressed, among them age verification.

For instance, if the Australian government pursues a method where companies require all users, not just younger users, to verify their ages before they can use a platform, it could result in

social media companies being forced to collect user identification, which would raise privacy questions.

Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, has advocated verification on the device level – meaning Google and Apple would verify the ages of people wanting to download specific social media apps.

The topic brings to mind a 2008 preschool Children and the Media study offered by William J. Thorn, associate professor emeritus of Journalism and Media Studies/Institute for Catholic Media at Marquette University, a transformative, Catholic, Jesuit university in Wisconsin, United States.

In what was already a highly commercialised media-saturated modern culture, Thorn’s evaluation of the literature then available on preschool children and the media was a reminder that the primary ‘job’ of young children is developing cognitive and social capabilities and not becoming socialised as consumers on a capitalist marketplace.

Even those who shun the media cannot avoid contact with others who are deeply influenced by them- Charles Buttigieg

I believe such a basic consideration should help us consider that it is the examination of the presence of the technologies and messages of social media in the growth and development of children and young teenagers that should lead the discussions of how, when and why to expose them to such media.

Focusing on the astonishing range and diversity of media accessible to people, especially in well-to-do countries, outpouring a vast content, ranging from hard news to pure entertainment, prayer to pornography, contemplation to violence, a Pontifical Council for Social Communications document on ethics in communication gives very important advice: depending on how they use the media, people can grow in sympathy and compassion or become isolated in a narcissistic, self-referential world of stimuli with near–narcotic effects.

Additionally, I believe many would concur that even those who shun the media cannot avoid contact with others who are deeply influenced by them.

The fundamental question appears to be who should take the bull by the horns and do whatever is possible and practicable to protect society, especially children and young teenagers, from social media harm.

Is it the state? Is it the parents?

Do we agree that this is an urgent matter and that legislators, who must have as their most sacred duty the protection of the common good, particularly as it pertains to children, youth and the most vulnerable members of the community, should start tackling the issue with sound action and, perhaps, laws?

Should the state strive for new effective ways and means of encouraging personal interaction among children, that is the direct communication and engagement with those around them, which often involves emotional and social elements, instead of them having an always bigger attachment to social media in their lives?

What importance should be given to the argument that the problem is not having kids and young teenagers using social media platforms but parents not caring about their children spending time with their heads in a screen?

How urgent is the need to educate better the parents to moderate their own children’s use of the social media and much more?

Parents surely need to redouble their efforts to provide for the sound formation of children and youth. They must, in particular, influence their children through the example they give; parental passivity or self-indulgence in regard to media, more so social media, teach false and damaging lessons to the young. For their children’s sake, as well as their own, parents must learn to practise the skill of discerning users of all the instruments of social communication, perhaps especially social media, acting as models of prudent users.

The educators have their role too, because they are the chief collaborators with parents in the full formation of children and young people.

I believe it’s high time that in Malta we seriously consider these matters too.

Charles Buttigieg is a former refugee commissioner.