The dangers of social networks, especially for minors, seem to be talked about often: it’s almost a cliché, a bit like that of transitional seasons or young people who don’t want to study. In reality, the public debate on the topic is essentially non-existent, as it is limited to paternalistic condemnations: the real reasons why social media can be dangerous are not discussed at all.

We also delude ourselves, as users, that we know how to move within the virtual world, that we have control over our relationship with social media: those who become addicted to it, who fall victim to scams, who develop psychological problems, are always the others. It certainly can’t happen to us.

We don’t really know the virtual environments we frequent

But, in fact, the most profound ignorance reigns on the subject, not only because we normally don’t study the social phenomenon, but we just live it, but above all because it is not easy to find honest and complete educational material on its functioning and effects. of these platforms. Lately, fortunately, testimonies, complaints and accurate analyzes are emerging more frequently: I think of the invaluable work of Serena Mazzini, of the battles carried out by Filippo Giardina, and recently, above all, of the declarations of Shari Franke (former “baby influencer”) in front in the Utah Senate. Federica Micoli’s excellent podcast, Followmania, is also enlightening, in which the digital strategist talks about her past as an influencer, explaining very well what disturbing mechanisms govern social networks.

We are therefore first told the point of view of those who have worked and work on social media: what being an influencer actually means, not only in practical terms but also in terms of psychological repercussions. The race continues for likes, views and sales; the search for companies to collaborate with, the creation of content that is always captivating and always in competition with the thousands of others who do the same job; the complete artificiality of the image that must be built and maintained. But it goes much further than this: the main critical points of social media are analyzed specifically, ranging from the fear of disappearing from feeds to the constant need to show off, to shitstorms and scams over which there is no control.

We are not interested in demonizing social media at all

The aim is not to demolish social media or propose a digital fast for the entire world: this would be the cliché of “it was better before”, which has no use and not even much reason to exist. Instead, it is a question of educating on the use of social media, and – hopefully – inducing the world of politics to realize that it is necessary to intervene to put an end to the anarchy that reigns there. Many of the things we see on social media would seem unacceptable elsewhere: think of the eleven-year-old girl who does winking ballets wearing adult clothes (never particularly covering, obviously) and receives comments of appreciation – if not explicit lust – from men . When would we ever consider it normal for our father or uncle to lewdly comment on the appearance and movements of a little girl? And instead it is the parents who put these girls on the internet, more often than not, precisely to attract views and comments from that type of user.

Exploited children

Child labor is illegal, we all agree that it is unacceptable. No? Yet, thousands of children are exploited every day on social networks, generating income for parents who build entire companies on the image, life, emotions and effort of their children. Fatigue, yes: so that you don’t believe that the children you see on social media are filmed like this, spontaneously, at random moments, without preparation and above all without coercion.

The same goes for the public disclosure of any moment of life, ours or – worse – that of others, minors or otherwise: the concept of privacy, which we have discussed so much in past decades, completely loses meaning on the internet, to the point that it becomes strange is the public figure who doesn’t tell his own facts or doesn’t show where he lives, who he lives with, what toothpaste he uses, or even the video in which he gives birth. Not to mention the publicization of personal pain, which has almost become a trend: we film ourselves while we cry, while we place flowers on the grave of a loved one, without giving any weight to private space. And what can we say, again, of those (even very followed ones) who go out into the streets to film homeless people and people with obvious mental health problems? Not only does it become normal to film people without their consent (or when they cannot express it consciously, as in the case of people in a state of serious distress), but above all to expose them to the whole world as freaks. We all know that when we remember the circuses that showed human beings, the “freak shows”, we must say that they were aberrant things; when instead it is the influencer on duty who makes himself look good by buying a pizza for a poor person or giving him an envelope full of banknotes, we also feel like good people because we follow someone who does “charity”.

Citizens have the right to be made aware of all these things (and many others), and to consciously choose whether and how to use social networks. As always, the task of preventing and combating abuse should fall to the State, which however is currently represented by people who were the first to gain votes by being influencers; consequently, perhaps it is time that those who work on the internet and have a voice strong enough to be heard begin to do their part.