What do you see as the primary way social media impacts Gen Z?
The primary way that social media impacts Gen Z is its encouragement of political activism among the younger community. Even within the Concord Academy community, this impact is evident, as many students feel comfortable reposting certain political statements or news online. Without having to speak to others face-to-face, posting on social media acts as a lower-risk option to expressing political opinions, which can be a controversial and intense action otherwise.
Additionally, social media (or a lack of it) provides opportunities for Gen Z to get involved with protests and political movements. For instance, the recent No Kings Day protests, which amassed millions of attendees nationwide, were partially organized and widely posted about online to help gain attention. On the contrary, a lack of social media can also spark Gen Z activism: the September Nepalese protests that followed a ban on social media in an effort to curb criticism of a corrupt government were also notably led by the generation. These current events, whether within our community or worldwide, illustrate the significant role that social media has played in motivating Gen Z activism.
Last year, the Federal Trade Commission released a report on data collection practices among social media and video streaming platforms. They concluded that, “Many Companies collected and could indefinitely retain troves of data from and about users and non-users, and they did so in ways consumers might not expect”. How does this finding impact the way you see social media’s impact on Gen Z?
Retaining and using data in unexpected ways could lead to many harmful situations, especially in the political landscape. One of these situations is an increase in misinformation absorbed by Gen Z via social media, which detrimentally impacts the rest of society. Reportedly, over half the number of users of social media applications such as TikTok (55 percent) and X, formerly known as Twitter (57 percent), admit to using the site as their primary news source, and individuals of the younger generation are proven to be more likely within that percentage.
Moreover, sites like X and Truth Social, Donald Trump’s social media company, seem to have become increasingly popular as places for politicians to post their opinions about recent news or debates. Notoriously, politicians might share incorrect and biased information about current events, and with the algorithms of social media sites based on the data collected about users, these posts can reach unsuspecting young individuals interested in politics. The exponential spread of this misinformation, fueled by the undisclosed usage of troves of data about users, could lead to unwanted effects on political campaigns, elections, and discussions, which Gen Z is becoming a vital part of.
Australia is banning social media for kids under the age of 16. What do you think of this ban, and how do you see it impacting Gen Z?
While this ban can be extremely beneficial for preventing the dangerous effects of social media, such as addiction and a decay in mental health, the ban also potentially endangers the future of the nation. As mentioned previously, social media is a popular and accessible outlet for political news as well as promoting activism in the Gen Z community. However, with a ban on these applications, instead of turning to regular news channels, former consumers might turn to even less reliable sources that would lead to more misinformation, or worse, young people might refrain entirely from keeping up with current events. This lack of political knowledge, beginning in the younger age group, could be harmful for Australia in the future, as Gen Z and Gen Alpha (individuals under 16) will soon assume critical political roles as voters and representatives. Without enough time and knowledge to fully develop their political values and standpoints, Australia risks raising a generation of underinformed and indifferent citizens.
If you could propose legislation regulating either social media companies or social media usage, what would you propose?
I would propose legislation regulating how social media companies use data collected from consumers. This would involve the amount of time companies are allowed to retain information for and whether they can share and sell data to third parties. The reason for this legislation is that user data can be utilized in such a large variety of ways, especially when given to third parties. Indeed, it is common practice for sites to gather specifics about users’ interests to support the accuracy of their own algorithms, but when material is handed to outside organizations, it can be twisted to promote content that is meant to convince rather than just entertain. When political parties gain hold of information about trends among certain users, they adapt their campaigns to appeal to specific demographics, perhaps straying away from their original values. In our world, with the help of social media and AI, this propaganda could expand to vastly affect nationwide decisions, highlighting the importance of legal regulations in this field.
After reading the other author’s opinion on Social Media, how has your position changed or grown?
While I was very focused on how social media’s effects on Gen Z would ripple out into the political landscape of greater society, Yuan’s writing considered the mental health impact that social media has on individuals. In addition to sites raising risks of misinformation within the younger community, she mentioned the extremely damaging consequences such as addiction, self deprecation, and productivity. Reading her opinion allowed me to grow my argument, as I realized that I had possibly centered too much on social media’s significance in only current and future politics, neglecting the harm that it inflicts on individual young users. This reminds me to carefully observe not only the general, worldwide impact of social media, but also to emphasize with the independent people that make up society.