Online Degrees and CLEP and DSST Exam Prep Discussion
Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - Printable Version

+- Online Degrees and CLEP and DSST Exam Prep Discussion (https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb)
+-- Forum: Main Category (https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb/Forum-Main-Category)
+--- Forum: General Education-Related Discussion (https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb/Forum-General-Education-Related-Discussion)
+--- Thread: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? (/Thread-Restricting-Social-Media-and-AI-for-Young-People-Effects-on-Learning-and-Networking)

Pages: 1 2

Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - Jonathan Whatley - 06-11-2026

Increasingly governments even in countries that don’t censor much are adopting or considering restrictions on social media and on AI chatbots for users under a threshold age like 16. Australia and several EU countries are currently enacting restrictions, Canada introduced a bill to do so yesterday, the European Parliament is considering pan-European restrictions, etc.

There are more than a few students under 16 in postsecondary courses designed principally for over 18s, including online.

Social media and AI are increasingly integrated with coursework often directly, or are used for extra-curricular but related networking.

How could (a) these restrictions directly, and (b) the more general concerns about social media and AI that they reflect, affect access to learning and networking?

How could they change how courses are designed, particularly courses that anticipate younger students, and maybe other courses too?

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - bluebooger - 06-11-2026

sounds like an eassy prompt for an english composition II exam LOL

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - Jonathan Whatley - 06-11-2026

(06-11-2026, 03:00 PM)bluebooger Wrote: sounds like an eassy prompt for an english composition II exam LOL

Typical instance of me trying to make conversation, lol!

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - ss20ts - 06-11-2026

Does a blue book come with this question? I feel like I need one of those and a #2 pencil.

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - Jonathan Whatley - 06-11-2026

My parents were both professors, this is how I learned to talk!

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - ss20ts - 06-11-2026

(06-11-2026, 05:53 PM)Jonathan Whatley Wrote: My parents were both professors, this is how I learned to talk!

This explains your love for education!

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - wow - 06-12-2026

I hadn't thought of this aspect. I remember the "old internet" when there were kid-specific sites like that one with the virtual pets (MyPet?) and, to some extent, MySpace. Of course, monitoring these sites and making sure they are kidsafe takes a lot of staff, and restrictions on advertising to kids restrict profits, so they can't make gobs of money the way Facebook can. Meanwhile, platforms like FB and Instagram can claim to be adult spaces (as in, spaces for adults, not as in porn sites) while doing specific things to hook kids and also restricting conversations, images, and topics in the name of "the children" -- restrict pictures of breastfeeding or discussion of sexual health, for example, while allowing kids to be subjected to bullying, eating disorder encouragement, and "maybe the Nazis were right" propaganda as long as there is no mention of boobies. Now governments have jumped in because social media firms aren't taking responsibility for the effects their products have. Problem is, the government solutions tend to overreach and, like the social media companies' "solutions," invade privacy and restrict speech and access to information for adults.

So .. no specific answer to your question yet. Just throwing my hands up at the mess this has become.

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - LevelUP - 06-12-2026

Ya this seems like homework, so I'll delegate the thinking to ChatGPT 5.5 high. Hehe.

How age restrictions on social media and AI chatbots could affect postsecondary learning

These rules could create a new kind of age-based educational access barrier: not a formal bar to postsecondary enrolment, but a bar to the surrounding digital infrastructure that many courses now quietly assume.

Australia’s rule already requires age-restricted social media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent Australians under 16 from having accounts. eSafety lists Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X, YouTube, Kick and Reddit among platforms it views as age-restricted. It also describes the rule as a “delay” to accounts rather than a penalty on under-16s or parents:
Australian eSafety Commissioner: social media age restrictions

Canada’s Bill C-34, introduced June 10, 2026, would restrict under-16 social media accounts and impose safety duties on social media and certain AI chatbot services:
Government of Canada announcement on Bill C-34

The European Parliament has called for an EU-wide minimum age of 16 for social media, video-sharing platforms and AI companions, with parental consent for ages 13–16, though that report is non-legislative:
European Parliament press release

Across the EU, national approaches are already diverging. A May 2026 Interface brief found that 23 of 27 EU member states were at least contemplating social-media age-gating legislation:
Interface: Social media age-gating in the EU

Direct effects on learning and networking

The obvious direct effect is that a course cannot safely assume every student can use the same external tools. A 15-year-old in a university-level online course may be able to enrol in the course but not create or keep an account on the platform where the class community, tutorials, guest livestreams, informal study group, public posting assignment, or professional networking is happening.

That matters even when “viewing” remains possible, because modern learning often depends on interaction: commenting, posting, joining a Discord or Reddit community, following practitioners, using YouTube playlists with account features, joining livestream chat, building a portfolio audience, or messaging mentors.

A second effect is unequal professional socialization. Older students may be able to maintain networks, participate in field communities, follow conferences in real time, ask questions in public forums, and develop a professional identity. Younger students may be pushed into observer status.

That is especially important in fields where opportunity flows through informal networks: software, art, journalism, music, esports, politics, research communities, open-source projects, and creator-oriented disciplines.

Third, AI restrictions could affect access to tutoring, brainstorming, coding help, writing feedback, language practice, and accessibility support. Even where academic AI tools remain available, vendors may respond conservatively: stricter age gates, parental consent flows, reduced features for minors, fewer integrations into open courses, or institution-only versions.

Fourth, age verification itself becomes a barrier. Students may have to disclose age, submit identity checks, obtain parental consent, or use jurisdiction-specific access routes. That creates privacy and dignity concerns, especially in adult courses where a younger student may not want to be identified as a minor.

Fifth, restrictions could widen inequities. The students most affected may be those who rely on online communities because they are geographically isolated, disabled, homeschooled, early-college students, economically constrained, or members of niche or marginalized communities.

The National Academies’ 2024 report emphasizes that social media can create community opportunities for marginalized youth as well as risks:
National Academies: Social Media and Adolescent Health

Effects of the broader concerns behind the restrictions

Even where no law blocks access, the climate around youth, social media, and AI will likely change institutional norms.

The concerns are not just censorship. They include attention capture, sleep disruption, cyberbullying, self-harm content, sexual exploitation, deepfakes, addictive design, dark patterns, recommender systems, privacy, manipulation, and AI dependency.

The U.S. Surgeon General’s advisory notes both positive and negative impacts and flags the lack of robust independent safety analyses. It also reports associations between heavy social media use and depression/anxiety symptoms:
U.S. Surgeon General advisory on social media and youth mental health

UNESCO’s generative-AI guidance similarly stresses data privacy, age-appropriate use, and teacher training, and recommends an age limit of 13 for classroom use of AI tools:
UNESCO guidance on generative AI in education and research

So even adult-oriented postsecondary courses may become less willing to outsource essential learning to commercial platforms.

Instructors may ask:
  • Is this platform designed for learning, or for engagement?
  • Are students being exposed to recommender systems and public attention metrics as a condition of completing coursework?
  • Does the assignment require a minor to enter an adult public forum?
  • Does an AI tool store student data, make inappropriate relational claims, or produce unreliable guidance?

This may also change what “digital literacy” means. Instead of simply teaching students to use social media and AI effectively, courses may need to teach platform risk analysis: recommender incentives, synthetic media, parasocial AI, verification, source evaluation, privacy, prompt hygiene, automation bias, and when not to use AI.

How course design may change

Courses that anticipate under-16 students will probably need a minor-safe pathway by default. No required assignment should depend on an age-restricted public platform account unless there is a fully equivalent alternative.

Assignments such as these become risky unless the course supplies an approved, age-appropriate route:
  • “Post a TikTok.”
  • “Join the course Discord.”
  • “Comment on YouTube.”
  • “Use Reddit for peer review.”
  • “Ask ChatGPT to critique your draft.”

A likely design pattern is that public/open tools become optional enrichment, while core participation moves into institutional systems. Learning management systems, institution-hosted forums, moderated discussion boards, approved video platforms, library resources, and institutionally contracted AI tools become the default.

Public social media becomes a case study or optional professional channel rather than core infrastructure.

Assessment design may also shift. Instructors may replace public posting assignments with simulated or closed-audience versions:
  • Write a public-facing thread, but submit it inside the LMS.
  • Produce a video, but share it in a private gallery.
  • Analyze a social media campaign using screenshots or archived datasets.
  • Role-play professional networking in a moderated course forum.
  • Critique AI outputs provided by the instructor rather than requiring every student to access the same chatbot.

Courses may need clearer AI-use tiers, such as:
  • No AI.
  • Instructor-provided AI outputs only.
  • Institution-approved AI only.
  • Open AI tools allowed only for students who can lawfully access them.
  • Alternative non-AI tasks available where needed.

This is especially important because AI in education is also increasingly regulated beyond age restrictions. In the EU, AI systems used in high-risk areas including education are subject to AI Act rules, with rules for education applying from December 2027:
European Commission: AI Act regulatory framework

Younger-student versions of adult courses may also need stronger moderation and pastoral infrastructure. If a course includes public-facing work, controversial topics, adult communities, political debate, sexual-health content, trauma-related material, or professional critique, the design should specify:
  • what minors can access;
  • how harassment is handled;
  • who moderates;
  • what reporting channels exist;
  • whether parental or guardian consent is needed;
  • and how to avoid compromising the student’s academic privacy.

The deeper change is that courses may stop treating “the open internet” as neutral infrastructure.

For adults, social media and AI can remain powerful learning and networking tools. For minors in adult courses, they become conditional tools: useful, but only when age access, privacy, safety, equity, and pedagogical necessity have been designed for explicitly.

Some of my thoughts on social media restrictions in general  (Warning: If you want the status quo, read above and don't read below)

This social media stuff is headline legislating, or taking the path of least resistance.

You can do studies and build a case (strawman) against almost anything, then argue for legislating it. For example, there was a push to ban mini-blind cords because they killed a few children per year, far fewer than the total amount of people that are killed by lightning each year. So mini-blind cords were banned. Okay, whatever.

But when you zoom out and look at the actual data on what physically harms or kills children, things like the opioid crisis, childhood obesity, or even traffic accidents, social media barely registers on the same scale.

So why do politicians spend so much time talking about algorithms and writing sweeping laws to restrict them, while systemic issues get pushed onto the back burner?

Social media is the perfect scapegoat. Teen depression and anxiety may be rising, but the causes are complex: economic uncertainty, academic pressure, changing family structures, social isolation, and many other factors. It's much easier for society to point a finger at social media and say, "There, that's the villain," than it is to fix a broken mental healthcare system.

In the end, it's not really about the math or logic. It's about emotion, and that's often how legislation gets made.

Importance of Social Media to People

In 2023, the Reboot Foundation (a research group focused on critical thinking and media literacy) published a survey that found: 64% of teenagers (ages 13 to 17) said they would rather give up their right to vote for a year than give up their social media access. Even among young adults ages 18 to 24, almost 60% said the same thing.

https://reboot-foundation.org/teenagers-would-give-up-the-right-to-vote-to-keep-social-media-survey-reveals/

The question is whether these politicians want to go to war with young people when there could be either an immediate backlash or a delayed one, such as when those young people become old enough to vote and help vote those politicians out of office.

I don't know how all countries operate. Here in the U.S., we have First Amendment protections, and teenagers are increasingly acting as plaintiffs in federal lawsuits. For example, a high school student in Utah recently partnered with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) to sue the state's attorney general over its sweeping social media law. They argued that social media functions as a modern public square and that forcing users to upload a government-issued ID to access it is a direct violation of their First Amendment rights to free speech and access to information.

In Nepal, after the government suddenly banned 26 major social media platforms, teenagers used the remaining communication channels, such as Discord and VPN-accessed apps, to organize a massive, leaderless uprising. Thousands of Gen Z students marched in the capital to protest what they viewed as the silencing of their voices. The pressure was was so intense that it forced the prime minister to resign and the government to reverse the digital ban.

Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - NotJoeBiden - 06-12-2026

Can we not clutter posts with AI slop?

RE: Restricting Social Media and AI for Young People: Effects on Learning and Networking? - LevelUP - 06-12-2026

(06-12-2026, 10:02 AM)NotJoeBiden Wrote: Can we not clutter posts with AI slop?

It's actually pretty ironic to bring up banning AI in a thread that is explicitly discussing how governments are trying to restrict AI and social media for young people.