Listen to the article (audio text automatically generated by an automated system)

0:00

3 minutes to read

I followed with interest the discussion in the Shura Council regarding the Communications, Space and Technology Commission's demand to set age verification controls and impose restrictions on the use of social media platforms for those under the age of sixteen.

Advertisement

The idea is not new; several countries have preceded us in this, each with its own experience in limiting children's access to inappropriate content. But before we await the results of this demand, perhaps we should pause at a simpler question: What are those under sixteen watching today? The answer is no longer limited to scenes of 'violence' or 'pornography'; there is content that is difficult to classify! Clips combining horror with mockery, images generated by 'artificial intelligence', scenes designed to shock, and ideas that touch on 'nightmares' more than being entertainment material. This type of content does not pass by the child once, but repeats before them until the strange becomes familiar. The question becomes more urgent: If a child suffers from a developmental disorder such as autism, or any condition that affects their perception of content, how do they receive these scenes? How do they interpret them? And what impact might they have on their behavior, or on their interaction with themselves and those around them? These are not hypothetical questions, but a reality that deserves to be part of the discussion. Notably, this content does not reach the child by chance; rather, the 'algorithms' push it to them the longer they stay in front of the screen, suggesting content weirder and more exciting than the previous, until they find themselves in a world completely different from what adults imagine they are watching. I am not among those who turn every issue into a 'space for theorizing'; I always prefer that the discussion begins from reality and ends with applicable solutions. And reality says: An entire generation spends long hours in front of content whose details we only know to the extent the 'algorithms' allow, while the discussion—often—remains confined to the duration of use, not the nature of what is displayed on the screen. Moreover, we need this file to be a subject of specialized study, not just scattered impressions. So what is the nature of the most watched content among those under sixteen? What are its effects on mental and behavioral development? And how are these effects among children with developmental or psychological disorders? Answering these questions will give decision-makers, families, and schools a clearer picture than any individual efforts. Age verification may be an important step, but it is not the end of the road; rather, it is the beginning of a broader discussion about the digital environment in which our children are growing up today, what should reach them, and what should stop at the age gate. * Bottom line: We may differ on the means of protection, but we should not differ on the question that has been long overdue: What are our children watching every day?

Quoted from "Al-Madinah"

Advertisement material

Advertisement material

Disclaimer: All published articles represent only the opinions of their authors.