Evidence of meeting #21 for Canadian Heritage in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was kids.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
We'll call this meeting to order.
Before we begin with our witnesses, I want to advise members that we have a couple of budgets to approve for the meetings coming up, including the meeting with the minister. The amount requested is $500.
Is everyone in favour of approving this budget for food the day we have the minister coming to speak on supplementary estimates?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
We have another budget for the study on the effects of influencers and social media content on children and adolescents: $2,500 for food during those meetings.
Does everyone agree to pass that budget?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Moving on, the final thing I want to mention to members is that we've been invited, I think by the Embassy of Israel, to meet with some anti-Semitism experts this afternoon. You've all been invited. I wanted to verify that you all have that invitation. They're meeting with us and members of the justice committee this afternoon.
With us today for our final meeting on the effects of influencers and social media content on children and adolescents, we have six witnesses. Thank you all for being with us today.
We have Carol Todd, the mother of Amanda Todd and founder of the Amanda Todd Legacy Society, with us by video conference. We have Maude Bonenfant, full professor and Canada research chair in gaming, technologies and society, from UQAM. From Capsana, Guy Desrosiers is here with us in person. From Children First Canada, Sara Austin, Zachary Fathally and Josephine Maharaj are here by video conference. From Luna Child and Youth Advocacy Centre, we have Karen Orser by video conference, and from the Shalem Mental Health Network, which I know very well, in Hamilton, Ontario, we have Aimee Berends.
Welcome.
To start, everybody has five minutes. As an organization, if there are three of you, you get five minutes in total.
We'll start with Carol Todd.
You now have the floor for five minutes for opening remarks.
Carol Todd Founder and Mother, Amanda Todd Legacy Society
It is an honour to speak here. Thank you, Chair and members of the committee, for inviting me to speak today.
My name is Carol Todd. I am here as a mother, an educator and an advocate and as someone whose life was permanently changed by the devastating impacts of online harm on a young person. Amanda's name has become known worldwide in the fight against cyber-bullying, sextortion, exploitation and mental health, all of these being online harms and what we are here to talk about today.
When I talk about online harms, it isn't theoretical for me. It comes from a deep and personal space and lived experience. I am a mother who buried her child because of what began on a screen. My daughter Amanda was bright, creative and full of possibility, yet her life was stolen by the cruelty of online exploitation, relentless bullying and a digital world that was never built with safety in mind. Her story is not just a headline or a cautionary tale. It is a reminder that behind every statistic is a child who needed protection, a family who expected safety and a world that still needs to do better.
I'm going to go a bit off my written words because I have way too many words. I have sat through all four of the other committee meetings, and one of my fears is that I may not get a chance to say what I need to say off-script. I have submitted my words, and I will resubmit them. They're available for reading. Please read them, because they have lots of detail, empathy and emotion in them.
What I want to say off-script is this. My daughter died in 2012, in October. As a mom and as an educator in British Columbia, I have spent my time ensuring that I understand what is going on in the world in the digital space, and my role as an advocate, a mother and an educator is to ensure the safety of others. The safety of others includes children, youth, adults, caregivers, seniors—basically anyone in the world, no matter what gender, what race and what identity they have.
This is important to me as a Canadian citizen and as an individual, because online harms have been going on for way too long. This started for Amanda back in 2009. We are in 2026 now. Those harms have escalated. Those harms haven't gone away. When I stand in front of this government or a government in the United States or a government in Australia, this is what I say: What are we doing to help the kids and the citizens in our country?
We worked hard. I was in a Canadian heritage meeting back in 2021 or 2022 in British Columbia, and in the Canadian heritage group we were talking about online safety and online harms. That was four years ago. Another bill was brought up and tabled last year or the year before, and it also died in Parliament for whatever reasons.
An online safety bill—we would like an online safety act tabled—and the online harms act are of the utmost importance to all of us. I am in touch with many parents who have lost children or are parent survivors of kids who have dealt with trauma due to online harms. They could not be here today, so I am here for them. I am speaking with them. I am in contact with them. We all, as a parent collective, say out loud that we need better protections for our children, which includes making big tech responsible and includes our government making legislation to ensure that our kids remain safe or become safe in the environment they live in.
No longer are we living in just an environment in an open space. We are living in a digital world. Ninety-eight per cent of children have access to a mobile device and are on Wi-Fi.
As an educator, I go out and talk to parents. I teach my teachers. I also talk to the students in my school district. There are about 40,000 of them. I know what is happening out there in that world and why we need to be a voice.
As I said, I went off-script. I did not read my eight pages. If I don't get a chance to speak again, please read what I have written.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Will do, Ms. Todd. I will tell you that I don't think anyone in this country will ever forget what happened to Amanda. That speaks both to her personality, which you mentioned, and to your advocacy all these years. I want to thank you for that.
We'll turn to Maude Bonenfant, who is here in this room.
You have the floor for five minutes.
Maude Bonenfant Full Professor, Canada Research Chair in gaming, technologies and society, UQAM, As an Individual
Madam Chair and honourable members, thank you very much for your invitation.
I've had the opportunity to listen to some of the witnesses who have appeared before you. They delivered eloquent statements on the practices, usage and harms associated with social media, especially as it relates to content. Today, I'd like to draw your attention to something related to my area of expertise, namely the purpose of the economic model, including how it's designed and how it works.
I'd like to highlight four aspects. The first aspect is the importance of understanding economic models because these models provide leverage points for action. As you know, we went from a model where one purchased a product outright to one where a product is provided as a long-term service, and then to one where it's provided for free. Obviously, the free model must make money, and there are three main ways to do that when it comes to social media.
The first is advertising, which represents billions of dollars. Right now, all kinds of strategies are being deployed to blur content, to the point where readers wonders whether they're dealing with advertising, an influencer's material, or sponsorship. There lies the first problem, which is difficult to pin down, especially for young people.
The second aspect is microtransactions. On some platforms, influencers can ask their followers to send them money. This could be young children sending them their pocket money. Platforms will then take a percentage, which can be as much as 50%. On some platforms, such as Roblox, it can be as much as 70%.
There is also the commodification of personal data. As you know, there is a market for personal data, which circulates worldwide. I really want to stress this point on the collection of personal data about young people.
A large-scale harvesting of data is under way. Some of our work has focused on privacy terms and conditions for mobile applications, and currently, they don't comply with Quebec, Canadian or American legislation. There are all kinds of strategies to collect data, including through third-party companies, which are deployed on mobile devices at the same time as social media, and this data is circulated around the world. This comes with a number of risks, including identify theft and other long-term risks. If we start collecting data about our children when they're young, about their habits and how they live, imagine the type of profiling on them that can be done later when they apply for insurance, money for a house, or a job. They could be turned down because they have been profiled from childhood. There's a probability they will be deemed uninsurable, and they will not fully understand why.
Additionally, geolocation data is now being collected. This issue doesn't receive the attention it deserves. Geolocation data is often collected in a completely illegal manner because the geolocation of children is not allowed. However, there are a number of ways in which this is being done. The data is circulating and can end up in the hands of predators. Predators can find out where children live and go to school, and their lifestyle habits, and use this information to approach them on platforms, such as Roblox or other social media. This issue doesn't receive the attention it deserves either.
How is the data used in the data economy? Obviously, it's used to create profiles with the aim of carrying out targeted advertising. Young people are increasingly being singled out and pressured to consume more. There's a reason billions of dollars are being spent on advertising, because advertising works. Children, young people and young adults can be manipulated in their purchasing behaviour.
We're hearing about recommendation algorithms with increasing frequency. These infamous algorithms are becoming more and more sophisticated and specific, with the consequences that you all know. Young people are getting trapped in content pushed to them.
Now, there's a move to generative artificial intelligence where one needn't even create content. The content is generated automatically, which carries risks tied to personalized feeds, a key driver of social media retention. With generative artificial intelligence, we're now seeing extreme levels of personalization, along with all the risks that come with that. The rise of generative artificial intelligence has amplified existing problems, which, in my view, remain insufficiently regulated.
My third point is on the use of persuasive techniques to drive and boost profits on these platforms. What this means is that people use design strategies to influence the behaviour of young people, and it works.
One example of ways to keep people engaged is infinite scroll. The brain is not designed to process an infinite flow of content. It needs breaks, pauses and moments to stop. This infinite scroll plays on this cognitive bias.
Another example is the stimulation of content creation. These platforms don't create content. Users create content, as is the case with Airbnb and Uber, where users generate money for businesses. To nudge users to create content, there's a “like” button, and all it entails in stimulating the brain's reward system, including dopamine release. Platforms also exploit that factor.
Another tactic is to draw people back to the platforms through the infamous notifications, even on platforms aimed at toddlers.
There's also the issue of getting people to spend money using all sorts of strategies, including simplifying transactions to make it possible for people to spend money with two or three clicks.
The final example involves prompting people, including children, to view advertisements. On that note, I want to emphasize that dark patterns remain unregulated. It's now possible to manipulate interfaces to lead young people to take actions they hadn't planned on taking.
My fourth point is on a design aspect that has been magnified to a great degree, namely, gamblification. Betting and gambling are the most addictive activities. These platforms use betting and gambling strategies to keep users hooked for as long as possible. There is an increasingly grey area between gaming and gambling, which means gaming is now drifting into gambling. Skin betting and virtual item exchange are becoming more common, with influencers promoting this practice. Currently, gambling is being promoted among young people. This used to happen on the Twitch platform, but since it was banned, the practice has migrated to Kick, a platform where anything goes. Currently, young people, sometimes very young, are being introduced to gambling on this type of platform.
In conclusion, I'd like to say that social media, gaming and screens have very positive impacts. However, as you know, for our children and adolescents to benefit from these positive effects, we need comprehensive legislation and regulation. If it's safer upstream, young people will feel better downstream. We need to think about safety by design. We need to make these spaces safer from the design stage, and so companies have to be brought in to work with us.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Thank you very much.
We'll now turn to you for five minutes, Mr. Guy Desrosiers.
Guy Desrosiers Chief Executive Officer, Capsana
Good day, everyone. Thank you for your invitation to appear today.
First, you have a copy of my brief. I'm going to skip through it. We can rest assured that we're not alone in experiencing this situation. Countries all over the world are now trying to figure out how to recalibrate the place of the digital world in our lives, and this is something that has now become essential. The effects are felt not just by young people, and I'll underscore that throughout my presentation. We're all affected by the positive, and potentially negative, impacts of screens. We need to find solutions, hence the importance of recalibrating the place of screens. Nobody but the industry is to blame. The industry has consciously adopted addictive strategies due to the business model that Ms. Bonenfant has described so eloquently. Ms. Bonenfant and I are in fact working together on some of these areas.
The next three pages of my paper provide data on health impacts. I work with an organization that is attached to the Montreal Heart Institute, and we work in primary and secondary prevention of health problems.
It's also important to know that young people are well aware of the potential harms of screen use, but we're not here to blame them. This is a shared responsibility, as we'll see later. The important thing to note is that according to a very recent study out of Montreal, in the last three years, screen time for leisure purposes has increased across all segments of the population, not only among young people. Here, I want to emphasize that I'm talking about screen time for leisure purposes.
One takeaway is that usage in excess of two hours per day for leisure purposes is related to the onset and increase of health problems. For those who are following the document, this is at the bottom of page 3. Obviously, the recent emergence of artificial intelligence, which Ms. Bonenfant has just spoken to, is only making things worse. I have also described potential harms at the bottom of page 4, and I'll skim through them. There are potential physical, psychological, social and educational harms. We can come back to that later if members wish.
I wish to specifically focus on five major recommendations that I'd like to share with the committee. First, we need to recognize that screens are here to stay. They have become an essential part of our lives. They need to be recognized as a lifestyle habit, in the same manner as sleep, food and physical activity. They will continue to be part of our lifestyle habits. The problem now is that we are all learning how to manage this new lifestyle habit together. Parents have had to learn and children are learning at the same time, which is not the case with sleep habits, for example, where our parents explained clearly when it was time for us to go to bed, that we had to go to bed and get up in the morning. We're all learning how to cope with screens at the same time.
We call on the Government of Canada to close the gap by investing in understanding and analyzing this lifestyle habit over time, because it will evolve. The industry is evolving at a fast pace. For example, our studies on gaming are different from three years ago. The same goes with social media, which has evolved from three years ago.
I also ask that parents be held accountable, but above all, that they be supported. Ms. Todd provided a shining example earlier. I believe parents need to be supported in this aspect of their role. According to a 2022 study, the biggest challenge families are facing today is managing screen time at home.
My third recommendation is, where possible and within each authority's jurisdiction, encourage educational and child care settings to remove personal devices and screens from schools and child care settings, which are learning and socialization environments.
My fourth recommendation seeks to increase awareness of initiatives that are sound but isolated, such as the initiative we developed a few years ago known as PAUSE, which remains largely incomplete due to a lack of funding. The pauseyourscreen.com website is for parents, children, educators and professionals. There are other initiatives as well, of course. Ours is not the only one out there.
I'd also like to ensure we avoid demonizing screens and stigmatizing youth. As I said earlier, we need to measure the overall impact of screens on health, employment, the economy, culture, identity, democracy and politics. Lastly, there's a need for oversight within the industry, which doesn't want to be regulated and is fighting across the world against potential legislation. I think we need to take back control, either through a digital regulatory authority or any other type of regulation, and the industry must be held accountable for its impacts, just like any other product in society.
That's the end of my presentation. Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
That was really interesting. Thank you very much, Mr. Desrosiers.
Next we'll go to Children First Canada.
I'm not sure which of you will be speaking, but collectively you have five minutes for opening remarks.
Sara Austin Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Children First Canada
Good morning, and thank you to the chair and members of the committee.
My name is Sara Austin. I'm speaking to you today as the founder and CEO of Children First Canada, advocating for the rights of eight million children. I'm also the mother of a teenage boy whose 15 years of life has been entirely immersed in the digital age.
I'm joined by two brave and remarkable youth, Zachary and Josephine, and we're here with a very simple message: We do not need more studies and we do not need to debate whether social media is a problem for children. We already know the answer. The evidence is overwhelming and consistent.
Children are sexually exploited, groomed, bullied, extorted and exposed to content that harms their mental health and development at scale every single day. These harms are foreseeable and preventable.
It has been 1,619 days since the government pledged to table the online safety act, and kids are still waiting. That's why we launched the countdown for kids: to make delay visible, measurable and impossible to ignore. While Parliament studies, platforms profit, and while committees debate, kids pay the price. Every day of delay costs children something they cannot get back—a day of their childhood.
We launched the countdown for kids in honour of children like Amanda Todd, Rehtaeh Parsons, Carson Cleland, Daniel Lints, Harry Burke and many more who tragically died due to online harms. Their lives were full of possibility, and their pain was preventable. We say their names because decisions that you make have real consequences.
It seems painfully obvious to parents and children what the solution is, and we need your help. We are fighting against a multi-billion dollar tech industry that opposes the online safety act because their profits depend on engagement at any cost.
Yes, one might reasonably ask what chance parents and kids really have in this David-and-Goliath fight. I live in Alberta, and there's one thing you learn quickly here: You never get between a mama bear and her cubs. The mama bears of Canada are not going down without a fight, and I can promise you that the papa bears are fighting too.
Let me be very clear: There is no silver bullet. No bill will be perfect and no law will stop every harm, but perfection has never been the standard for protecting our children. Seat belts aren't perfect, food safety laws aren't perfect and toy safety standards aren't perfect, yet Parliament has acted when children's lives have been in danger.
We cannot afford partisan gridlock again. If there's one thing that all of you should agree on, it's the protection of our children. This is not about censorship, it is not about moral panic and it is not about blaming parents or children. It is about accountability. Children cannot vote. They do not sit in cabinet. They do not control multi-billion dollar algorithms.
Today, I ask you, our Prime Minister and all members of Parliament to treat this as what it is: a crisis that's endangering the lives of Canada's children. Please table the online safety act and pass it quickly. Stop asking children to wait. The time for studies is over. It's time for action.
I now pass the floor to Zachary and then to Josephine.
Zachary Fathally Member, Youth Advisory Council and Young Canadians' Parliament, Children First Canada
Hello, everyone.
Thank you so much, Sara, for introducing us.
My name is Zachary, and I'm 12 years old. I'm here today not just for me but also as a member of the Young Canadians' Parliament, speaking for kids across Canada.
Adults talk a lot about kids like me, but we don't get asked very often what it actually feels like to grow up online. For my generation, the Internet isn't just screen time. It's where we learn. It's where we play. It's where we connect with our friends and maybe where we live. It's also where kids get bullied, where they see things they were never ready for and where mistakes can follow them forever.
Adults always tell us to be careful online, but how can we be careful when websites are designed to keep us scrolling no matter the cost? That's not a fair fight, and it shouldn't be our job to fix it.
Kids don't need more studies to explain what's bad online. We're living it. It's our home. It's in our phones.
With AI everywhere, the task won't be easy. It's mind-boggling to see how fake content can be created. Imagine that being used against kids.
My message to this committee and to the Prime Minister is simple: Kids have waited long enough. Pass a strong online safety act. Hold companies accountable. Make safety the default, not a setting we have to implement ourselves.
Thank you.
Josephine Maharaj Member, Youth Advisory Council and Young Canadians' Parliament, Children First Canada
Thank you, Zachary. I'll be quick.
My name is Josephine Maharaj, and I'm 17 years old. I'd just like to thank the chair and members of the committee for this opportunity.
Social media is a system that shapes what we see, how we feel about ourselves and how we think we're supposed to look, act and live. Having come of age in the last decade, I can say that logging off is no longer a viable option for dealing with the risks that come with being online. The Internet is no longer a place that we can leave. It is a cornerstone of our lives. School, work, friendships, news and hobbies are now largely set in the digital landscape.
Current attempts to make the online world safer for children are often remedial or insufficient. They come in the wake of preventable tragedies, and they are often not extensive enough to prevent more kids from being exploited, groomed or hurt.
Thoughtful solutions can only be developed through respectful and consistent collaboration between youth and policy-makers and by holding tech companies accountable for systems designed to take advantage of those who use them.
Thank you for your time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
What very well-spoken witnesses we have today. Thank you.
Next we'll turn to Karen Orser from the Luna Child and Youth Advocacy Centre.
You have five minutes.
Karen Orser Chief Executive Officer, Luna Child and Youth Advocacy Centre
Good morning, Madam Chair and committee members.
My name is Karen Orser. I am the CEO of the Luna Child and Youth Advocacy Centre, located in Calgary, Alberta. The other hat I wear is that of co-chair of Child and Youth Advocacy Centres of Canada.
CYACs provide an integrated response to child abuse. This means that when children experience abuse, those systems, rather than having them navigating complex public systems on their own, come together to wrap around the child and provide coordinated care. The CYAC model was also recently recognized by the federal ombudsperson in the “Rethinking Justice” report as a best practice.
It is because of the investment in the model by the Department of Justice that we have nearly 50 child and youth advocacy centres in Canada. We have also recently formed both a national association, Child and Youth Advocacy Centres of Canada, and Kindex, the national research and knowledge centre for CYACs.
We're in the early stages of developing national data-collection capabilities and will soon have the capacity to provide very thorough national data on the nature and prevalence of child abuse in Canada, though today I'll be providing some more general statistics and some information from our data at Luna.
I will also state that I'm not an expert in social media. However, I'm grateful to speak with you today about how social media and technology show up in relation to child abuse cases seen at CYACs.
Historically, technology-facilitated abuse was seen as something that occurred in isolation, separate from contact-based abuse; however, we are increasingly seeing crossover between online and in-person forms of harm. Because of how CYACs operate, and particularly how referrals and triage occur, the cases we see involving social media and technology also include contact-based abuse.
CYACs are most definitely seeing an increase in files that involve technology and social media. Last year, just over 15% of the children and youth who came to Luna had abuse experiences involving an online or image-based component. This includes luring; the taking of inappropriate images; the recording of offences; the creation, sharing and consuming of CSAM; the showing of child sexual abuse materials; sextortion; and AI-generated CSAM.
The demographics of kids in these files are similar to those in non-Internet-related cases and perhaps slightly older. Caucasian and Black youth are represented at higher rates in image-based abuse files, whereas indigenous youth are represented at higher rates in contact-only cases. Sexual exploitation is particularly concerning, rising from 1% in non-Internet-related cases to 13% in cases where there is an Internet component.
Today, I want to highlight two areas related to technology and child abuse: the harms of access to and the unintentional viewing of harmful content and the increase and nature of technology-involved child abuse.
We know that viewing and accessing harmful content such as child sexual abuse material or adult pornography can impact young people's normative sexual development, their understanding of sex and sexuality and their ability to discern what's age-appropriate. Exposure can normalize or desensitize children to high-risk or harmful behaviours.
There's also a connection to problematic sexual behaviour, or PSB. PSB refers to children 12 and under initiating sexualized behaviours that are developmentally inappropriate or potentially harmful to themselves or others. At Luna, in 2025 we saw a 40% increase in PSB cases. Viewing pornography, intentional or not, is a known risk factor for PSB. If we don't do more to keep kids from viewing harmful content online, there are significant risks.
I'm sure that at this point the committee is well versed on sextortion, CSAM and AI-generated CSAM. I have included some statistics in my brief related to the alarming and rising trends in all three of them. I will share that at Luna, in 2025 alone, we saw a 34% increase in files involving CSAM and also an increase in files with AI-generated CSAM.
In terms of recommendations, social media and technology have significant impacts on the well-being and development of children. As they relate to child abuse and maltreatment, I would offer the following.
First, strengthen collaboration and coordination between child and youth advocacy centres and child exploitation units, or ICE units. Currently, CYACs receive some cases, while ICE receives many others, and we're really limited in our ability to provide coordinated and equitable services.
Second, support cross-sector information sharing. Support policy frameworks that enable safe, privacy-conscious information sharing among police, child protection, health care and CYACs when technology intersects with child maltreatment.
Third, we need to ensure professionals receive training on emerging dynamics and to provide specialized training on interviewing children about technology use, digital coercion, image sharing and online grooming.
Fourth, we need to promote coordinated data collection across Canada. CYACs are working to develop a minimum dataset, and consistent data will support policy development, prevention and clear response protocols.
Finally, engage with technology companies, as many have said, and advocate for stronger safety features and reporting tools and for child-centric design, including minimum age enforcement and default privacy protections.
Thank you for your time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Thank you.
This is very disturbing testimony we're hearing today.
I'm sorry. Did you say PSB? What does that stand for?
Chief Executive Officer, Luna Child and Youth Advocacy Centre
I'm sorry. PSB is problematic sexual behaviour.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Thank you.
Finally, we will turn to Aimee Berends from Shalem.
You have the floor now for five minutes.
Aimee Berends Registered Psychotherapist, Shalem Mental Health Network
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, committee members.
Today, I'm privileged to provide testimony representing opinions and recommendations from the clinical staff at the Shalem Mental Health Network. Shalem is a non-profit agency and a member of Family Service Ontario, based in Hamilton. We provide counselling and psychotherapy services to individuals, couples, those in relationships and families. We receive our clientele by self-referral, and we offer virtual and in-person services. In Hamilton, Shalem is known for its affordability and accessibility, allowing folks of any background or means to access excellent therapy services for a fee that fits their income level, thanks to community foundations and donors.
I am a certified music therapist and registered psychotherapist at Shalem. Our clinical staff are all registered psychotherapists, social workers or placement interns, so I've asked members of my team to contribute their opinions and reflections to prepare a collaborative statement today.
There's a general sense from our team that the impact of social media on children, teens and their families is substantial. We've seen the benefits of social media with our clients, such as decreasing stigma by exposing kids and families to stories of mental health, and the benefits of free access to psycho-educational and mental health resources. However, there are numerous questions we're left with as clinicians. While there is growing evidence of clinical approaches and guidelines for families, the boots-on-the-ground framework still needs to catch up.
We see families trying to make sense of whether their child's social media use is problematic and what to do about it for the sake of their development. Kids need to learn how to slow down, how to reflect and how to regulate themselves, but when kids are bombarded with content without much control to moderate the exposure, we see them trying to cope, but missing out on opportunities to practise regulation skills.
Partial information or misinformation is challenging for families. We observe families struggling to make sense of the barrage of online information from sites and sources that purport to make use of empirical science but whose methodologies miss the mark. We commonly see clients diagnosing themselves with conditions or mental illnesses that then impact their expectations for therapy and treatment, as well as for themselves and their circles of support. We also see families doing their best to care for their children, but perhaps offering advice that's misguided and based on information they gleaned from a social media source.
We see gaps between parents and kids and gaps in parent awareness. We see parents not knowing what their kids' online activities are or not understanding the impact of unmonitored use. Conversely, we see parents who are aware of the risks, maybe even hyperaware, but have very few guidelines for how best to protect their children in the granular decisions made each and every day.
Parents generally seem sensitive to the social costs of non-use. Parents also may be struggling to limit their own social media use. We hear about families concerned about the amount of time spent together such that parents may sometimes choose to use social media as the way to bond with their kids. One clinician noted that they've seen families use social media to soothe neurodivergent kids and teens.
In terms of recommendations, we have the following to say.
Social media conversations among families have some similarities with other arenas that parents use to model safety, sound judgment and growing independence to their kids. However, there are unique phenomena with problematic social media use that require our attention. For example, the definitions of visibility and privacy have been rewritten. Social belonging is completely different, too, in how we make friends, belong in a community and repair conflicts.
Content sticks and it's hard to erase, and for some, the audience is not forgiving. A tweet or an Instagram post is hypervisible, collapses the context of what's happening, blurs boundaries and requires constant management to broker the perceptions of the story being told. Families need to learn how to have open conversations about these things and how to guide their children appropriately.
We need more clear guidelines for the continuum between use and non-use. Longitudinal studies would be ideal to compare the long-term impacts for young people over time.
There could be real costs, and those have been spoken to today, of a young person's activities, especially in cases of abuse, cyber-bullying, body image issues, depression, etc. However, social media platforms are also what adults use for employment opportunities and professional networking; therefore, non-use for teens may impact future employment if total non-use is what we're advising. Helping parents, teachers and therapists who are guiding these kids to moderate use, or use any disconnective practices, would be most welcome.
We need all the players to take responsibility for protecting our young people. Social media is one of many factors that are disrupting sleep, shortening attention spans, limiting in-person social skills, worsening anxiety, causing dependent habits and perpetuating bullying behaviours, body image concerns and negative social comparisons.
We need prevention and education from multiple sources. Families need help. Parents need support. Research needs to be translated into bite-sized pieces for the average Canadian parent to use today.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Lisa Hepfner
Thank you.
We will now turn to questions from members of the committee.
Mr. Généreux, you have the floor for six minutes.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank all the witnesses. This is really interesting.
Mr. Desrosiers and Ms. Bonenfant, I'm turning 64 soon. I remember that when I was five, six, seven or eight years old, I used to watch Bobino, Sol et Gobelet and shows like that. I remember that I'd come from school and watch television from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. That was my screen time.
You have alluded to screen time for leisure purposes. Obviously, today's screens include telephone and tablet screens. Back then, screens were black and white television sets before colour televisions came on the market. We still have television screens, but now, they are 80 inches wide.
I'm referring to screen time because I think your organization also talks about well-being and physical health in particular. Obviously, time spent in front of a screen involves little movement.
Screen time today is different compared to 50 or 60 years ago. The figures you quoted earlier mentioned an average of two hours of screen time. That's generalized data. It doesn't necessarily refer to children, but to the population as a whole.
When it comes to content, the quality of what we find on screens now is likely to be much more of a threat than what we used to watch. I want to make this clear. All this content makes a difference in people's lives.
In your opinion, is there a connection to be made between screen time and content interface? The question is for both of you, because it seems you work together. I'm referring to the quality of what we used to have back in the days. To be clear, Bobino is not the same thing as today's artificial intelligence. It's a lot less threatening.
I will let you answer the question.
Chief Executive Officer, Capsana
Maybe you had televisions that were kind of similar to mine. My dad's television was a bulky piece of furniture. I couldn't bring it to the bathroom or to my bedroom, or take it outside and pretend I was going to play soccer. I couldn't sit in a corner and continue to look at social media, play video games or watch streaming content. Obviously, devices and the strategies behind them are different from those of that era.
Now, time is just one of the three points I described in the subtitle on page 3 of my paper. We have to factor in duration, time and place, and type of content consulted. Combining these three elements will help us assess the benefits and potential harms of screen use. It's a bit more complex.
Obviously, I talked about screen time because many studies focus on that. When we look at the study published by the Montreal Regional Public Health Department on the potential harms of screen time, we see that the moment we double screen time from two to four hours, sleep problems begin because this time is often borrowed. This is time borrowed from quality sleep. This is time borrowed from physical activity or time spent outdoors.
Data on sleep deprivation show that nearly half of young people now report being sleep deprived. Rates of dissatisfaction with life double, and go up to 24% for those with four or more hours of screen time.
Obviously, in our studies, we are required to provide quantifiable indicators, and time is one of them, because other indicators are not always easy to measure.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC
Do you want to say something else, Ms. Bonenfant?
Full Professor, Canada Research Chair in gaming, technologies and society, UQAM, As an Individual
I would add that the television programs that you watched as a child were quite slow. The pace was slow, and you kept a certain distance from the screen. Now, and this has been demonstrated, images are accelerated. They move really fast. Children and adolescents are overstimulated with very fast images. That's one difference.
Additionally, screen use is interactive. The youth are made to do something. They have to click. There are all sorts of strategies to apply pressure, especially to make them watch ads. There's a great deal of advertising on social media, even if children are not necessarily aware of this, with such things as the unboxing video phenomenon. They see other young people use products, unboxing products. They think they're just watching some random person, but in reality, it's a form of advertising.
Each of these factors can interfere with the healthy development of young people.