Internet: A minefield for youngsters?

The Internet is a minefield, especially to children and youngsters. At least, if you can believe the media. A selection from the headlines of the past months (editor's note: translated from Dutch to English):  

• Vulnerable children extorted online: the dark side of game platform Roblox (De Volkskrant, 25 August)
• The misogyny from Adolescence really exists, in the Netherlands too: ‘Figures like Andrew Tate are fully parroted’ (Het Parool, 05 April)  
• Criminal organisations recruit youngsters online to serve as ‘cannon fodder’: ’They're just sacrificed’ (De Telegraaf, 29 April)  

This past May, 1,400 medical experts wrote an urgent letter to the Dutch cabinet expressing not only concerns about children's safety online, but about their mental and physical health too. This is why they propose that children under 14 should not get smartphones and should only be allowed on social media after they turn 16. They join the ‘Ouderpact Smartphonevrij opgroeien’ (Parental Pact growing up Smartphone Free) with the same scope. Is this rigorous measure necessary?

Everyone their own timelines

The news items on sadistic chat groups, misogynistic influencers, recruiting criminals and paedophiles on game platforms are shocking. The Internet is full of unsavoury scum and dirty pictures, but not every timeline is flooded with it. It depends on your age, gender, education level, political preference and viewing behaviour. The algorithms of the platforms, meaning the advanced computation rules, determine which content is shown to users. So the core question is: how do online platforms guide our behaviour, what does that mean for developing youngsters and should we intervene? 

It often starts innocently. A video on fitness, or a picture with an inspiring quote. But the algorithms of platforms like YouTube and TikTok cause more explicit material to appear in the timeline more and more often, then you suddenly see influencers who say women should be submissive.

The guiding algorithm

Joris Veerbeek is a data researcher at the Utrecht University Data School. He collaborated with De Groene Amsterdammer to research the Dutch manosphere, the online world in which especially young boys are radicalised in their opinions on masculinity and women.  

In five hundred videos, a teenage boy is in a trap of toxic masculinity. That was shown when Veerbeek had twelve robot accounts scroll through TikTok with a special interest in videos about masculinity, self-discipline and traditional roles. “It often starts innocently,” he explains. “A video on fitness, or a picture with an inspiring quote. But the algorithms of platforms like YouTube and TikTok cause more explicit material to appear in the timeline more and more often, then you suddenly see influencers who say women should be submissive.”  

According to Verbeek, the tech companies want to capture the users as long as possible. “And that just works best with videos which shock or polarise. These receive much more views and likes.” How the algorithms of social-media platforms work exactly is unclear. Veerbeek says: “I hope for regulations by the EU, for instance, which compel tech companies to be more transparent and actively motivates them to correct harmful traps. That they develop algorithms which recognise it when someone is scrolling through hateful content for a long time, for an example, and then actively refresh the timeline with a more varied range of videos.”

Criminogenic content, what is that?

The manosphere and accompanying messages with misogynistic content received much attention in the past year. But there are more shadowy worlds, which are less known. Criminologist Dr. Evelien Hoeben (UU and Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement) researches so-called criminogenic content. “Especially fighting videos and photos with wads of money and luxury goods make the rounds and are shared,” she tells. Hoeben emphasises there is currently no direct evidence that online temptation leads to offline misbehaviour. “Maybe there is,” she adds, “but we can't say that yet in this stage. It's difficult to prove a causal link. It's not like all kinds of ‘innocent souls’ are shown fighting videos and are then recruited for criminal jobs.” It's possible that youngsters who have already had contact with the police before see criminogenic content more often, but also that it's a widespread phenomenon among youngsters in general. 

Parents often have no idea that their children see this kind of content and think it's difficult to have conversations about ‘the online world’. Hoeben says: “You can start by asking open questions or watching along while they scroll through their timelines. In various research projects, youngsters indicate that they're open to this and sometimes even appreciate it. Caregivers can then, especially for young teenagers, play an important correcting role by continuing to repeat that violence, narcotics and weapons aren't normal and aren't as prevalent in reality as they may seem online.”  

Critical thinking will become one of the most important skills of this era.

Mental health and screen use

Youth and media researcher Dr. Helen Vossen (UU) emphasises the importance of these conversations too. She collaborated on the Guideline for Healthy Screen Use (June 2025), which is full of tips for caregivers, based on the latest academic insights, in order to teach children and youngsters to deal with screens in a healthy way. That is desperately needed. Vossen says: “Your beliefs are formed by the information you get daily, especially when you're in the crucial forming period of puberty. If that's much misogynistic information, you have to be strong to not internalise that. Critical thinking will become one of the most important skills of this era.”

Caregivers can guide towards this. “Don't just ask how their day at school was, but online too. Did you run into something funny or scary? Be curious about the answers and avoid a disapproving or pedantic response. Imagine it's about misogynist content, you can then question them about their beliefs. The odds of heated or nasty online experiences are big. But if youngsters can talk about it, that doesn't have to have big consequences.”  

What to do next?

Not realistic

Helen Vossen says: “I'm against the idea of growing up smartphone free, because it's not realistic. The internet and social media are like traffic: that can be dangerous too. That's why we introduce children to it in doses and under supervision at an age where they still listen to caregivers. You don't wait until they're 16 to put them on a bicycle and then say: ‘You figure it out.’”