Thus, 70% of Quebec adults would be in favor of the establishment of a digital majority, François Legault even going so far as to state that social networks are “ pushers virtual”. The comparison is interesting and rich in parallels, but perhaps not in the way some understand it.
First of all, if social networks are addictive, like a drug, why should they only be so for young people? Wouldn’t adults be equally vulnerable? While current discourse tends towards the decriminalization and/or legalization of drugs, why do we see a reverse course for social networks?
Certainly, young people are currently already regulated by laws in order to reduce as much as possible their exposure and their possible consumption of alcohol and drugs. That said, the problems persist despite the presence of several infrastructures and prevention programs: do we really believe we have the means to put in place such additional programs to not only condemn, but rehabilitate and supervise the minority of problem cases?
Asking the question is a bit like answering it: we will most likely not resolve anything substantial among young people that adults do not freely inflict on themselves.
Furthermore, just like with drugs, the dealers are rarely the ones who control the cartel. Here, in control of the social media ecosystem we find… adults! And not only in the offices of GAFAM (web giants), but also in investment funds. It’s hard to blame young people for the popularity of social networks, but it’s not their fault if the price of the NASDAQ index is currently reaching heights that will allow adults to live their pre-retirement more comfortably.
So why target young people for a problem that mainly concerns adults, who constitute the strong statistical majority of users? Were the January 6 riots in the United States the fault of young people? Are the anti-vax and major misinformation movements (no, the Earth is not flat!) caused by young people? Were the lynchings in India and the genocidal actions in Burma, motivated by Facebook, provoked by young people? The answer to all of this is simple: no.
On the contrary, we could even put forward the argument that young people are much better equipped than adults to deal with these situations and to proactively denounce misconduct themselves online. That the mental health of young people is no more fragile than that of adults; on the contrary, virtual emancipation is much more adequate among young people than among adults. And that, in any case, the minimum age for accessing social networks is already set at 13 years old and their use must be done under full parental supervision.
It is no coincidence that the requested digital majority finds the least support among 18-24 year olds, these “young” adults knowing the platforms well and being well aware of their challenges and their benefits. But perhaps one day we should also listen to them.
For the moment, this debate will certainly continue to rage in a divisive, even violent manner, between adults, on the same social networks that we would like to spare only young people.