The views expressed in this article are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Breaking Belize News.
By Nuri Muhammad: More than fifty years ago, Imam W. Deen Mohammed introduced a simple idea that has stayed with me: “Words make people.”
To understand what he meant, we first have to understand his use of the word “word”. A word is not only something spoken from the mouth or printed on a page. In the Imam’s methodology, a word can be anything that communicates meaning to the human consciousness through the senses. What we hear is a word, but what we see can also be a word. A picture, an image, a gesture, music, a taste, a touch and even our environment can communicate meaning. Everything that reaches our consciousness and leaves an impression upon the mind is, in that larger sense, speaking to us.
Another expression frequently heard from Imam Mohammed was “Man means mind.” He was not giving us an English-language etymology. He was directing our attention to the consciousness, intelligence and capacity for thought that distinguish the human person. Put the two ideas together and an important principle emerges: Words make people. Man means mind. Therefore, we must be concerned about what we allow to enter the mind. The eyes and ears are not merely windows through which we observe the world; they are gateways through which the world enters us.
Long before algorithms, smartphones, Instagram, Facebook and TikTok, Imam Mohammed was teaching us to pay attention to the language environment in which human beings are formed. Today we have created perhaps the most powerful language environment in human history, and we have placed it in the hands of our children.
When I was growing up, parents worried about the company their children kept. We understood the old saying, “Show me your company and I will tell you who you are.” Parents wanted to know: Who are you talking to? Where are you going? Who are your friends? Today a child can be sitting quietly in his or her bedroom while keeping company with thousands of people, and behind those people is something even more powerful—the algorithm.
The algorithm studies the child. What makes him stop scrolling? What makes her look again? What makes him angry or curious? What image holds attention? What video produces another click? It learns and then feeds the user more. The commercial objective of these platforms is not primarily the development of a healthy child. Their business depends heavily upon attention, engagement, data and advertising. The longer we remain engaged, the more commercially valuable that attention becomes.
In the language of Imam Mohammed, therefore, we should be asking: Who is selecting the words, pictures, sounds and experiences entering the consciousness of our children?
This is no longer simply the concern of old-fashioned parents complaining that children spend too much time on their phones. The scientific and medical warnings have become substantial. The U.S. Surgeon General reported that up to 95 percent of teenagers ages 13 to 17 use social media, with about one-third saying they use it “almost constantly.” Young people spending more than three hours a day on social media faced double the risk of poor mental-health outcomes, including symptoms of depression and anxiety. Concerns have also been raised about sleep, attention, social comparison, body image, self-esteem, exposure to inappropriate material and the displacement of healthy activities.
We should be careful not to make the science say more than it says. Social media is not the only cause of depression, anxiety or behavioural problems among children, and not every child who uses social media will be harmed. There are educational, social and creative benefits. But when credible scientific authorities identify meaningful risks to developing minds, we cannot simply wait until every question has been answered.
Other countries have decided that waiting is not good enough. Australia now requires major social-media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent children under 16 from maintaining accounts. Significantly, the responsibility is placed upon the platforms rather than simply punishing children or their parents.
Mexico is also moving seriously in this direction. In July 2026, President Claudia Sheinbaum announced national discussions aimed at developing proposals for regulating children’s and adolescents’ use of digital platforms and social media. Proposals before the Mexican legislature have included age restrictions, parental consent for younger users, stronger privacy protection, restrictions on personalized advertising to minors and controls on digital designs intended to keep children continually engaged.
The point is not that Belize should copy Australia or Mexico word for word. The point is that governments are beginning to recognize that protecting children in the digital environment is a legitimate responsibility of the State.
Meanwhile, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, is facing major litigation in the United States over allegations concerning the effect of social-media products on children and young people. Thousands of claims involving Meta and other technology companies allege that social-media platforms were deliberately designed in ways that encourage compulsive use and contributed to harm among young users. Meta strongly disputes these allegations and maintains that it has invested heavily in protections for children and teenagers.
We do not have to wait for the final American court decision to begin asking our own questions in Belize. Must Australia act before Belize becomes concerned? Must Mexico legislate before we begin discussing legislation? Must American courts first tell us how dangerous these products are? Are our children not of the same value as children anywhere else on this planet?
Our children are exposed to the same Facebook, Instagram and other platforms, the same infinite scrolling, carefully selected images, social pressures and sophisticated techniques designed to hold attention. A Belizean child’s developing mind is no less valuable than the mind of a child in Sydney, Mexico City, London or Los Angeles. In fact, as a small developing country, we should perhaps be even more protective because the minds of our children are among our greatest national resources.
I am not suggesting that we smash the phones, close down the Internet or pretend that we can return our children to the world of the 1960s. That world is gone. Neither should concern for children become an excuse for government censorship of adults or political speech. Any legislation must respect privacy, freedom of expression and legitimate access to information.
But surely Belize can seriously examine legislation establishing a minimum age for social-media accounts, meaningful parental consent, privacy protections for minors, restrictions on targeted advertising to children, controls on deliberately manipulative design features and meaningful penalties when companies fail to protect children. Schools must also be part of the discussion, along with parents, teachers, religious communities, NGOs and the children themselves.
We also have to recognize that parents cannot fight billion-dollar algorithms by themselves. We tell a mother or father to “control your child,” while on the other side of the telephone screen are some of the richest corporations in human history employing sophisticated technology, behavioural science, artificial intelligence and enormous quantities of user data to discover what keeps human beings looking. That is not a fair fight. Government has a legitimate role—not replacing parents, but giving parents protection against forces far more powerful than the individual family.
And so I return to Imam W. Deen Mohammed. Fifty-one years ago, when he assumed leadership of the community following the passing of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, there was no Instagram, Facebook or TikTok. There were no smartphones sitting in the hands of eight-year-olds. Yet the methodology he taught gives us an extraordinary way of understanding the problem confronting us today.
Words make people. And a word is more than something spoken. A word is a carrier of meaning. Pictures, videos, music, advertisements and the entire digital environment are speaking, and day after day they are speaking directly into the consciousness of our children.
If “man means mind,” then protecting the developing mind is part of protecting the developing human being. The question is not whether our children should participate in the modern technological world. Of course they should. The question is who will help determine what enters their minds while those minds are still being formed—their parents, their community and their country, or an algorithm whose principal responsibility is to a corporation seeking to profit from our ignorance?
Fifty-one years later, the warning contained in those few words may be even more relevant than when I first heard them: Words make people. If we care about the people our children are becoming, then Belize must become much more concerned about the “words” that are making them.
The post Words Make People Part 1 -Protecting Our Children appeared first on Belize News and Opinion on www.breakingbelizenews.com.
The views expressed in this article are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Breaking Belize News. By Nuri Muhammad: More than fifty years ago, Imam W. Deen Mohammed introduced a simple idea that has stayed with me: “Words make people.” To understand what he meant, we first have to understand his use
The post Words Make People Part 1 -Protecting Our Children appeared first on Belize News and Opinion on www.breakingbelizenews.com.
