Teenagers give their considered political responses to the bill introducing a social media ban.

What do they say about denial being the first stage of grief? After the government this afternoon proclaimed the end was nigh for under-16s using social media, teenagers simply told The Spinoff no. “It’s not happening. No way,” one teenage boy mumbled, while scrolling TikTok. 

Letting them know that it does, in fact, look to be happening and that a bill had been introduced to parliament today didn’t have much of an impact on attitudes. “What am I supposed to do? Go outside?” one teen asked, joking but also not joking.

The Spinoff’s pacy – and highly unscientific – survey of under-16s about their thoughts on the bill, threw up a wild juxtaposition with the teens education minister Erica Stanford interacted with in a video that rolled during today’s press conference where she joined with prime minister Christopher Luxon and National MP Catherine Wedd to announce the ban. 

In the video, the mature-seeming teenagers sat around a table with Stanford and spoke articulately of the horrors they’d seen online – the killing of Charlie Kirk, a woman bleeding out on a train. The music was haunting, the children sombre.

Let’s just say The Spinoff seems to run with a different type of crowd. When asked about the dangers of social media, the tweens and teenagers we know shrugged or scowled. “It’s taking away what the kids want instead of taking away the dangers and trying to improve it,” one said.

Some survey respondents were not concerned by the ban, a few supported it, and others were annoyed by it. All indicated they’d like us to leave them alone so they could get back to what they were doing, thanks. 

Under-16s respond to the social media ban announcement

So pointless. I speak to my cousin in Melbourne every day on Snap. There will be a way around it anyway.
– 14-year-old 

Yeah, it is really dumb because it will probably just make kids, like, depressed or something.
– 11-year-old

Oh, that’s sad. No further comment.
– 12-year-old

I just feel like it’s so pointless because everyone will just change their date of birth anyways.
 – 15-year-old 

I really do not care. Not in a rude way. I don’t use any of those apps.
 – 11-year-old

Yeah, it’ll be solid, I guess. Has potential to be great, but also poor. I think it depends on which social media are banned because I think it’s still important to be able to message your friens to organise activities adn wotnot, but we don’t the brainrot ones.
– 14-year-old

I know it’s to protect people, but it’s the way I communicate with my friends. It’s the way that I can be updated about music and new products and get information about events and school and the world around me.
– 11-year-old

I know it’s to stop young people from seeing things they shouldn’t, but maybe they could just put settings on the apps that stop dangerous content instead, rather than cancelling it fully. It’s useful. The changes are annoying, because I’ve just gotten a phone, and it’s a great way to communicate with people.”
–13-year-old

I don’t mind because I don’t use social media but it’s not a good idea because it restricts your access to what is going in the world. But it’s also a good idea for people that are addicted to it.
– 14-year-old

Ah awesome. I’m excited for it because it will make it easier for me to focus on football. Though I’m not sure people will actually follow it.
– 14-year-old

It’s pretty crazy. It’s an old age [16], cos usually now days kids are on social media by like 12. Snapchat? A lot of people get on there quite young. It’ll be a big change.
–15-year-old