Seeing Past l Monitoring children on social media a should | Columnists

It’s kind of weird the way we calculate risk and danger. I didn’t know growing up, but there are actually entire careers out there that are geared towards defining it.

I mean it makes sense doesn’t it? How else would insurance companies find out how much we have to pay to be insured? If I stay at home and don’t go anywhere, my risk factor is significantly lower than with those who walk from skyscraper to skyscraper on high ropes.

Such a risk makes sense for us – especially because we pay for it.

Get more from the Citrus County Chronicle

But there are obviously other risks in life that we intuitively grasp. We teach our children not to walk in traffic. We understand the value of seat belts and airbags because we understand the dangers of driving a car. We tell our children not to touch a hot stove.

Notwithstanding the debate about COVID-19 security measures – and that’s a big caveat, but not the point of this column – we tend, by and large, to take the necessary precautions to protect our children and our communities.

Except when it comes to social media.

We no longer send our children to school with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches because we know that even if they are not allergic to nuts, they can come in contact with someone who is. We go in and have delays at sporting events when lightning is 10 miles away because we know storms can come pretty quickly. We keep our children in car seats until they weigh almost as much as a young adult because we are concerned about their safety.

Yet the medium that encourages our children to eat laundry detergent, steal and destroy public property, and make violent threats against our schools is completely uncontrolled by government agencies, societal norms and, more importantly, humble parents.

State regulation can have limited weight under the first amendment when it comes to social media companies and platforms. And while the founding fathers could never have imagined today’s communications capabilities and commitments, the general idea of ​​free expression by government must remain.

Even so, there is definitely room for a regulator, much like the FCC, to do something about this. But censorship of any kind is a slippery slope and needs to be approached consciously and carefully. Therefore, regulation of teenage social media use should rightly come from those most responsible for raising the future generation – parents and families.

The most recent TikTok “challenge” circulating among schools of students making threats of violence on December 17th came this week when two students added Inverness Middle School to a previously posted thread.

Hats off to the students who reported the post of school management. Knowing what channels to go on when they see suspicious or worrying things is a big part of the fight. But it shouldn’t rest on the shoulders of our teenagers.

As parents, community leaders, and role models for the future generation, we must establish oversight over our children and social media. No parent wants to be the one who will be tough on their child and rob them of access to their social lifelines or monitor them. I get it. It’s a tough road.

We understand that our teenagers are not ready for certain things in life. As a result, they don’t have a full-time job, still live with their families, and have to raise their hands to go to the bathroom during school. These are all things we don’t blink an eyelid about. Monitoring and regulating their social media shouldn’t be either.

It is not a question of whether we should act. It comes down to how much harm we allow before we do it.

Cortney Stewart is a 2003 graduate of Lecanto High School. She has a BA in Political Science and International Affairs, a Masters in Intercultural Studies and is currently working on her PhD. in international conflict management.

Most recently, she taught and trained students, teachers, and government officials in Baghdad, Iraq, for two years. Email her at [email protected].

Comments are closed.