Social Media: “Like” It or Leave It

 

           Meet Lillian: a 14-year-old middle-schooler who just wants to be liked. Liked in terms of clicking the “heart” button on Instagram, or a friend request on Facebook. “Likes” on social media have the ability to transpire into the perception of being liked in “real” life. An abundance of attention on social media leads to an increase in self-esteem, a feeling of empowerment, and validation. However, what happens when Jess, Lillian’s best friend, gets more likes on her Facebook profile picture? Or, only 5 people like Lillian’s Instagram post? A lack of attention or validation on social media can result in insecurity and vulnerability. Thus, parents of social media users should limit, but not eliminate, usage and create an open environment for conversation about social media.

           It is undeniable that social media is an integral part of teenage life. In fact, “22% of teenagers log on to their favorite social media site more than 10 times a day” (“Common Sense Media,” 2009). While social media has negative impacts on youth, others note the positive effects of social media. Social media creates an interconnected community, which allows young people to connect with people both in and outside of their networks. Young people are able to connect with others based on common interests and engage about social issues that they may otherwise feel isolated about. Ultimately, social media has the ability to create a special community for users to make them feel validated within society. The American Academy of Pediatrics’ clinical report acknowledged that socialization and communication, enhanced learning opportunities, and accessing health information are all benefits of social media usage with children and adolescents (Clarke-Pearson & O'Keeffe, 2011). Social media can help youths express themselves during a time when self-identity is not fully understood.

            The positive capability of social media is present, however the main point of contention within the context of social media and self-esteem is the benefit of socialization and communication  (Clarke-Pearson & O'Keeffe, 2011). The study notes that social media creates another way for users to stay connected with those in their network and communities. However, there is an important and critical distinction of why the user feels the need to stay connected in the first place. In Danah Boyd’s book she uses the example of 15-year-old Myra, to demonstrate why she engaged with social media: “I felt really disconnected from a lot of my friends’ cause they would always [ask], ‘Oh, were you talking to this person? And did you find out   about this kind of thing going on?’ I’m like, ‘No. What’s happening?’ So that really motivated me to and I thought it would just be easier to stay connected and stuff” (Boyd, 2008, p.108). Myra did not engage with social media to stay connected—she engaged in order to not be left out. Her initial interaction came from a place of insecurity and desperation to fit in. While her experience may be positive moving forward, her desire to become engaged with this social media cannot be ignored.

            In Generation Like, Douglas Rushkoff, the writer and correspondent in the film argues, “likes, follows, friends, retweets—they’re the social currency of this generation, Generation Like. The more likes you have, the better you feel” (Koughan & Rushkoff, 2014).  The notion that self-esteem can be derived from social media is explained by Patricia Linville’s empirical study on the complexity of self-identity and how that affects one’s self-representation. Her findings indicate, “for people high in self-complexity, the impact of a stressful event will tend to be confined to immediately relevant self-aspects, thus affecting a relatively small part of their self-representation and leaving many other self-aspects to serve as buffers against the stressful event” (Linville, 1987). For young people with limited self-complexity, a lack of attention or validation on social media can be seen as a stressful event, and with little to no “buffers” this event can thus affect their self-esteem in its entirety. Furthermore, Rushkoff notes that empowerment is a word that is commonly associated when youth is referring to social media. The film features young social media users saying that social media is way to let people know you’re there and ultimately nobody is there to tell you that you can’t express yourself, thus leaving them feeling empowered (Koughan & Rushkoff, 2014). However, when self-esteem and identity is entirely dependent on social media then the emotional wellbeing of the user is then threatened by a lack of social media validation.

            As demonstrated in Generation Like social media is largely used as a form of communication between peers and those in their networks. Dr. Valkenburg, Jochen Peter, and Alexander Schouten further studied the relationship between social networking sits and the potential effect on adolescent’s self-esteem in their 2006 study. Their findings indicate that social self-esteem is more likely to be affected if adolescents use the Internet as means of communication, as opposed to information seeking (2006). Furthermore, the research found that negative feedback on social media decreased both self-esteem and well-being (2006). This “negative feedback” can be reflective of Linville’s description of a stressful event. Essentially, social media sites are being used as a way to communicate with those in their network, and detrimental affects on self-esteem can occur if the adolescent does not receive positive feedback and approval from those in their network (2006).

            One of the main counter arguments in terms of the positive effects of social media is the benefit of social capital. According to Coleman, social capital refers to resources gained from relationships between people (1988). Further, research has found that there is a relationship between social capital and psychological well-being, which includes social media. The Internet, which includes social media, has been linked to both an increase and decrease in social capital. While social capital is an undeniable benefit of social media, it can also be achieved through face-to-face communication. Norman Nie claims that the Internet can take away from face-to-face communication, which can actually decrease social capital. Therefore, one of my recommendations is that parents encourage more face-to-face communication to ensure that social capital is still achieved.

            Both the positive and negative effects of social media are valid, and the main point of dispute is what should be done to limit harm to adolescent’s self-esteem. With the understanding that social media can negatively affect self-esteem and can ultimately put their identity into other users response, then the issue of responsibility arises.  Social media is mobile, and thus can virtually be accessed anywhere—so whose responsibility is it? I argue that there are two pieces to this solution: both parents and social media policy are critical components.

             There are three approaches that parents can utilize to protect their children from the negative effects that social media can present. Firstly, parents should limit but not eliminate social media usage entirely. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation claims that 8-18 year-olds spend an average of 7 hours and 38 minutes a day using entertainment media, which includes social media (2010). The study further notes that the majority of children do not have limits regarding media consumption; only 36% of young people have parents who implement rules about how long they can be logged into the computer (2010). While many parents are not setting limits on media usage, research has proven that parents who do see effective results. The Kaiser Foundation found that “when parents do set limits, children spend less time with media: those with any media rules consume nearly 3 hours less media per day (2:52) than those with no rules” (2010). Therefore, parents can effectively implement this by setting appropriate time limits. Time limits regarding social media can be determined through a discussion between the child and parent, while also referencing back to The American Pediatrics’ recommendation that young people should spend a maximum of two hours a day using entertainment media (O'Keeffe, G. S., & Clarke-Pearson, K). Thus, parents should set limits to media use, but not eliminate it entirely.

             Secondly, parents should foster an open environment in which children can feel comfortable discussing social media usage, which can be done in two ways. Ultimately, a combination of active mediation and co-viewing can be the most productive (Jordan, Strasburger, & Wilson, 2009). Active mediation can involve conversations with social media use to help young users understand that a lack of likes on a picture does not mean they are not well liked in “real” life. Further, active mediation is a tool that parents can utilize to evoke conversations about social to help them to understand that “popularity” on social media does not need to be a facet of self-esteem. Next, co-viewing, in terms of social media, can mean looking at Instagram feeds together and having an open discussion about what they are viewing. This can help to build mutual trust, where the parent is learning about social media and the child is allowing the parent to come into their intimate lives. Therefore, parents should not eliminate use altogether, but rather limit independent usage in substitute for active mediation and co-viewing. Eliminating social media can backfire, resulting in the child shutting down and using it in secret. Thus, it is suggested that parents of adolescent should monitor social media use, but not completely eliminate it.

               Lastly, parents should encourage children to engage in more face-to-face communication instead of social media usage. Pea at.al concluded that the “variable most closely associated with a wide range of positive social feelings was the same variable consistently omitted in studies of media use: time spent in face-to-face communication” (2012). Furthermore, they found that more in person communication lead to positive correlations such as social success and increased feelings of normalcy (2012).  Therefore, parents should encourage replacing a portion of social media usage with face-to-face communication. Due to the fact that social media usage can be mobile and easily accessible at all times, parents can encourage disengaging for these networks when they are in face-to-face settings. For example, parents should encourage children to not use social media when they are partaking in family dinners or car rides. While this may seem like a challenging task, findings indicate that those who engage in more face-to-face communication are less compelled to use media simultaneously (Pea at al., 2012). In other words, once young people are engaged in face-to-face communication they will not feel the urge to take out their phone and scroll through Instragram or Facebook. Thus, parents should encourage and promote in person communication.

            While parents can implement the three approaches mentioned above, they cannot do this alone. Media organizations can help to lesson the negative effects of social media usage by enforcing stricter age restrictions for youth on social media.  A survey showed that 52% of children admitted to accessing Facebook before age 13, which is the official age limit. These numbers were fairly consistent with other social networking sites such as Snapchat (Quilty-Harper, 2014). Adolescents under the age of 13 are easily able to create a profile by entering a fake birthday. It is entirely possible that the creation of an account can be done without the parent’s consent or awareness, which can make it nearly impossible to monitor. In addition to the easiness of creating an account while being under age 13, it can also be argued that 13 year-olds are to young to use social media sites in general. Therefore, I argue that age restriction should be raised from 13 to 16 years old.

            Developmental psychologist, Erik Erikson claims that each individual mature through eight distinct developmental, or psychosocial, stages. Adolescence (age 12 to 18) is classified as stage 5, known as identity vs. role confusion (“PCCUA”).  During this time, adolescents are in the process of figuring out who they are as individuals by asking the question “who am I?” (“PCCUA”). This is a crucial stage in development, as the person is ultimately figuring out their identity. The adolescent can emerge after undergoing this stage of development in two ways: they can successfully figure out who they are and form a strong individual identity, or the opposite can result as the adolescent can become unclear about who they (“PCCUA”). Social media usage can further confuse this delicate time, as adolescents are newly concerned with how they appear to others. Therefore, I argue that age 16 is an appropriate age to begin to engage with social media, as adolescents fall into the later portion of this developmental stage. By age 16, most adolescents will have begun to discover their own identity and can be adequately prepared to face the social pressures of social media. Ultimately, by enforcing this age limit social media sites are letting adolescents figure out who they are for themselves without the mediation of the social pressure that stems from social media usage.

            I conducted a semistructured interview with three mothers who currently have children that are classified as adolescents (age 12 to 18). The children of the interviewees were age 10, 11, and 15. To the parent’s knowledge, all three children had at least one form of social media on their cellphone. The goal of these conversations was to receive feedback from real parents regarding the potential challenges that can result from the enforcement of my proposed solutions. Ultimately, I wanted to ensure that the three approaches that I recommend for parents is feasible, as well as get their opinion regarding the proposed social media policy. While I wanted the semistructured interview to flow as an authentic conversation, I came prepared with seven questions to guide the conversation. These questions can be seen in Appendix A. 

            I stated each conversation by asking the parent if they see social media as a problem or concern with their child. All three mothers said that social media was a concern on their radar but as one mother said “I feel hopeless because it’s [social media] everywhere” (2014). By “everywhere” the mother was referring to the immediate and contestant access that her child has to social networking sites. All three of the interviewee’s children had access to both cell phones and computers, which they claimed made it hard to manage. When asked if they believe social media could have a negative impact on their child’s self-esteem two parents answered yes, and one answered no. The mothers who said yes explained that their children expressed the social pressure that resulted from social media usage. The mother of the 11 year-old explained that her daughter “felt left out after seeing an Instagram photo of a group of her friends at a sleepover party that she was not invited to” (2014). Out of the three interviewees, two currently limit social media usage and engage in active mediation which they have found to be successful. The parents of the 10 and 11 year old do not allow the child’s cellphone to be in the room at night. They claimed that their children were fairly receptive to the limits that they placed on social media usage. In this regard, their responses were consistent with the Kaiser Family Foundation research.

            The main point of friction expressed in the semistructured interview was the appropriate age to allow their children to use social media.  All three parents agreed that it would make sense to not allow children to use social media before age 16, but they did not believe it would be possible to do this on their own—without the help of social media policy. The mothers expressed that they do not want to be seen as the “bad guy” by restricting social media usage. Therefore, increasing the minimum age to access social media sites from age 13 to 16 needs to be the responsibility of social media policy, not parents. Parents do not believe that they will be able to successfully enforce this age limit without the help of media organizations, which is demonstrated in my semi-structured interview.

            I believe this age restriction can be implemented and upheld through license numbers. In order to make a social media account, users should have to include a state issued license number in order to prove that they are at least 16 years old. However, if the parent and child feel adamant about using the social media site then they could also request parental consent to use the site. While Erikson’s psychosocial stages provide the framework for the development of adolescents it should also be noted that all children do develop differently. Therefore, if a parent feels that their child is ready to explore social media at age 14 or 15 they should still have the ability to have the final say. However, it should be strongly encouraged to support the social media policy’s age limit of age 16.

           Instead of telling Lillian to delete her Instagram and Facebook accounts all together, Lillian’s mom sits next to her as she scrolls through her social media feeds. This leads to an open discussion about what her friends are posting and why Lillian feels inclined to be on the social media. While social media can be a positive experience for young users, its negative effects without parental involvement and stricter social media policy negate it. Thus, limiting usage, incorporating meaningful conversations, encouraging face-to-face interaction, and raising the minimum age to 16 will enable social media to be an element of self-representation—but not the only element.

 

Appendix A

Semistructured Interview

• Does your child currently engage with social media?

• Do they have access to at least one social media account?

• Do you believe social media could have a negative impact on your child’s self-esteem/ well-being?

• Do you currently set time limits for social media usage?

• If yes, what is the time limit? If no, why not?

• Does your child feel comfortable talking to you about social media?

• If so, is conversation regarding social media initiated by you or the child? If not, have you done anything to help the child feel more comfortable?

• Did your child have a social media profile before age 13 (that you know of)? If so, did you give your child permission to do so?

• What age do you think your child would be ready and mature enough to use social media?

• If social media policy enforced a minimum age of 16 would you enforce it as a parent? In other words, would you respect the age limit or allow your child to use social media while younger than age 16?

 

 

References

Boyd, D. M. (2008). Taken out of context: American teen sociality in networked publics. ProQuest.

 

 

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology, S95-S120

 

 

Clarke-Pearson, K., & O'Keeffe, G. S. (2011). The impact of social media on children, adolescents, and families. Pediatrics, 127(4), 800-804.

 

 

Daily Media Use Among Children and Teens Up Dramatically From Five Years Ago. (n.d.). Retrieved December 12, 2014, from http://kff.org/disparities-policy/press-release/daily-media-use-among-children-and-teens-up-dramatically-from-five-years-ago/

 

 

Erikson's Stages of Development. (n.d.). Retrieved December 12, 2014, from http://www.pccua.edu/keough/erikson's_stages_of_development.htm

 

 

"Is Social Networking Changing Childhood? | Common Sense Media." Common Sense Media. N.p., 10 Aug. 2009. Web. 22 Sept. 2014. <https://www.commonsensemedia.org/about-us/news/press-releases/is-social-networking-changing-childhood>.

 

 

Jordan, A.B., Strasburger, V. C., & Wilson, B.J., Children, adolescents, and the media. Sage, 2009.

 

 

Koughan, F., & Rushkoff, D. (Executive producers). (2014, February 18).Generation Like [Television broadcast]. PBS.

 

 

Linville, P. W. (1987). Self-complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and depression. Journal of personality and social psychology,52(4), 663.

 

 

Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420–35.

 

 

Pea, R. et al. (2012). Media use, face-to-face communication, media multitasking, and social well-being among 8-to 12-year-old girls. Developmental psychology, 48(2), 327.

 

 

Quality-Harper, C. (2014, February 7) Age limits to keep children off social networking sites aren’t working. Retrieved December 12, 2014, from http://ampp3d.mirror.co.uk/2014/02/07/age-limits-to-keep-children-off-social-networking-sites-arent-working/

 

 

Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their relationship to adolescents' well-being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(5), 584-590.