Analyzing Social Media Claims regarding Youth Online Safety Features to Identify Problem Areas and Communication Gaps

TL;DR

This paper investigates how social media platforms communicate about youth online safety features and risks. It analyzes 352 official communications from YouTube, TikTok, Meta (Instagram/Facebook), and Snapchat (2019–2024) using inductive feature extraction and deductive mapping to a 5Cs risk framework, plus a seven-problem-area taxonomy. It identifies uneven emphasis across risk areas, and three problematic communication patterns: rollout-mismatch, unclear feature operation, and lack of evidence of effectiveness. The study proposes guidelines and a problem-areas framework to improve transparency and accountability in youth safety communications.

Abstract

Social media platforms have faced increasing scrutiny over whether and how they protect youth online. While online risks to children have been well-documented by prior research, how social media platforms communicate about these risks and their efforts to improve youth safety have not been holistically examined. To fill this gap, we analyzed N=352 press releases and safety-related blogs published between 2019 and 2024 by four platforms popular among youth: YouTube, TikTok, Meta (Facebook and Instagram), and Snapchat. Leveraging both inductive and deductive qualitative approaches, we developed a comprehensive framework of seven problem areas where risks arise, and a taxonomy of safety features that social media platforms claim address these risks. Our analysis revealed uneven emphasis across problem areas, with most communications focused on Content Exposure and Interpersonal Communication, whereas less emphasis was placed on Content Creation, Data Access, and Platform Access. Additionally, we identified three problematic communication practices related to their described safety features, including discrepancies between feature implementation and availability, unclear or inconsistent explanations of safety feature operation, and a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of safety features in mitigating risks once implemented. Based on these findings, we discuss the communication gaps between risks and the described safety features, as well as the tensions in achieving transparency in platform communication. Our analysis of platform communication informs guidelines for responsibly communicating about youth safety features.

Figures (6)

• Figure 1: Historical account of overarching youth safety products that social media platforms include in their communications. We included Google here, as YouTube claims to use Google products to safeguard youth online.
• Figure 2: Flowchart of our data collection and preparation.
• Figure 3: Problem areas comprising the described safety features with the frequency of their mentions.
• Figure 4: Distribution of the communicated safety features for each risk type across the problem areas. Problem areas are sorted from most communicated to least communicated. The percentage shows the relative frequency of the safety features across the problem areas that aim to address a risk. Each column sums up to 100%. Overall percentages show how frequently risk types are mentioned by platforms.
• Figure 5: Problematic practices in social media platforms' communication lifecycle about youth safety features.