An op-ed by Market Institute President Charles Sauer in RealClearMarkets examines the growing push for government regulation of children’s social media use and argues that parents—not Washington—are best positioned to decide how and when their children engage online.
Sauer discusses recent litigation involving Meta Platforms and Alphabet Inc., as well as broader efforts by lawmakers to impose age verification requirements and restrictions on minors’ access to social media platforms. While acknowledging legitimate concerns about online harms, the piece argues that sweeping federal mandates risk infringing on free speech and parental authority while overlooking the benefits social media can provide.
As Sauer explains:
“The cases of young people suffering emotional and mental harms due to online bullies and trolls are tragic. However, given that 84% of teenagers have access to social media and 62% are daily users of social media, the number of victims of online bullying is relatively small.”
The article also highlights how social media can serve as an important outlet for young people seeking community, support, and shared interests:
“Young people can use social media to connect with other young people from around the country and even around the globe. Often their online friends share a common interest or hobby.”
Rather than expanding government oversight, Sauer argues that empowering parents with better information and tools is the more effective path forward:
“The truth is that children develop differently and the people best able to determine if—and when—a child is able to handle social media are that child’s parents.”
The piece further notes that most major technology platforms already offer parental controls and monitoring options that can help families manage screen time, limit access, and establish healthier online habits without heavy-handed regulation.
Read the full article from Charles Sauer in RealClearMarkets.
