The Under 16 Social Media Ban

[wayneL]

The Labour Party has introduced legislation to ban Under 16's from accessing social media (fully supported by the ilLiberal party as well)

Notwithstanding the merits or not of this legislation, it is going to require each of us to identify ourselves and probably via the recently introduced digital ID.

This means that each of us will have to register for digital ID to be able to access social media.

How do people feel about the under 16 ban and how do people feel about having to identify themselves via digital ID to access social media.

Additionally, and this is a question for @Joe Blow , how far does the definition of social media extend to? Will it apply to traditional forums such as this? Will we be forced to submit to digital ID to access ASF?

If passed this will have several implications for all of us and not to mention the law of unintended consequences.

There is a view that a VPN may be able to bypass this but they claim to be able to circumvent this. If this passes I will be out because it may certainly lead to some more nefarious goals.

I've talked to a few people about this and most people say that they will just leave social media altogether (and that remains to be seen if they do or not). I will probably just opt out altogether.

 

[SirRumpole]

The Labour Party has introduced legislation to ban Under 16's from accessing social media (fully supported by the ilLiberal party as well)

Notwithstanding the merits or not of this legislation, it is going to require each of us to identify ourselves and probably via the recently introduced digital ID.

This means that each of us will have to register for digital ID to be able to access social media.

How do people feel about the under 16 band and how to people feel about having to identify themselves via digital ID to access social media.

Additionally, and this is a question for @Joe Blow , how far does the definition of social media extend to? Will it apply to traditional forums such as this? Will we be forced to submit to digital ID to access ASF?

If past this will have several implications for all of us and not to mention the law of unintended consequences.

There is a view that a VPN may be able to bypass this but they claim to be able to circumvent this. If this passes I will be out because it may certainly lead to some more nefarious goals.

I've talked to a few people about this and most people say that they will just leave social media or together (and that remains to be seen if they do or not). I will probably just opt out altogether.

This forum is basically my own social media interaction. I don't care about X, Facebook, Instagram etc. I don't know how they intend that people confirm their ages. Do we need to do it every time we log on?

If it becomes too much of a hassle then I probably just won't bother.

Joe may have some answers.

 

[Joe Blow]

Additionally, and this is a question for @Joe Blow , how far does the definition of social media extend to? Will it apply to traditional forums such as this? Will we be forced to submit to digital ID to access ASF?

Honestly I have no idea. Nobody has contacted me but I suspect that's because ASF, being an old school forum, flies under the radar as we don't have any content that parents ought to be concerned about and we have a relatively small user base.

I also suspect that this move is all about headlines, about being seen to be doing something. This makes me think it's primarily about the big boys: Facebook, X, Tiktok, Instagram etc. But I could be wrong.

If age verification becomes necessary it is already built into this software so it can be implemented relatively quickly and easily. Any ID submission part would be a little more complicated though.

In short, I'm as confused as everyone else.

 

[wayneL]

It seems the Komrades have been talking:

 

[wayneL]

Here's what I find difficult about these sorts of things. If somebody is 15 years and 364 days old, they are not able to access social media. 2 days later when they are 16 years and one day old they will be able to access social media with all its benefits and harms.

This concept is utterly ridiculous. Additionally, young people being far more tech savvy then us old farts will be able to find all sorts of work around to be able to access social media. If parents want their children to be able to access social media for whatever reason, they will be able to facilitate that.

This actually invokes parental guidance just like previous to any ban that might happen. If I want my kid to read some content online that I think might benefit them, I would just log in myself and then hand the mouse over to them.

Therefore, the ban is not a ban.

In my particular section of social media that is the equine world, there are many reasons why under 16s should be able to access social media, learning about equine matters, finding out about competitions and their results, and even the care of their animals.

You think this ban will stop bullying? Hahaha. All of us who grew up before social media know that bullying has always been with us. If some stinking miserable brat wants to persecute some poor kid, no social media ban is going to prevent that.

In fact it will enable the bureaucracy to curate a particular narrative without the child being able to access any other views and indulge in some critical thinking.

You think that's not happening? As I have often pointed out that our local kindergarten is absolutely replete with all sorts of gender and sexual ideology, rainbow and LGBT flags over the place.

Dammit, when I was growing up no kids had any idea about this stuff until they were roughly 14-15 or older.

I'm convinced the agenda behind this is not what is stated on the face of it. As always, they create a narrative to fool the sheeple into support, the goal being something entirely different.

 

[macca]

Honestly I have no idea. Nobody has contacted me but I suspect that's because ASF, being an old school forum, flies under the radar as we don't have any content that parents ought to be concerned about and we have a relatively small user base.

I also suspect that this move is all about headlines, about being seen to be doing something. This makes me think it's primarily about the big boys: Facebook, X, Tiktok, Instagram etc. But I could be wrong.

If age verification becomes necessary it is already built into this software so it can be implemented relatively quickly and easily. Any ID submission part would be a little more complicated though.

In short, I'm as confused as everyone else.

If they make the age limit 16 as is being suggested, then many of us have been members of ASF for longer than 16 years so we are approved already

But, I do agree with a blanket ban on social media until the age of 16 years.

The stories of bullying are horrific and if we say just turn it off, it isolates that kid from their friends

By having a total ban then they all remain equally unplugged and are able to get relief from the incessant cruelty of the bullies.

A ban will also remind parents that the world has changed and they do need to monitor what the kids are reading and who they are chatting with.

 

[wayneL]

If they make the age limit 16 as is being suggested, then many of us have been members of ASF for longer than 16 years so we are approved already

But, I do agree with a blanket ban on social media until the age of 16 years.

The stories of bullying are horrific and if we say just turn it off, it isolates that kid from their friends

By having a total ban then they all remain equally unplugged and are able to get relief from the incessant cruelty of the bullies.

A ban will also remind parents that the world has changed and they do need to monitor what the kids are reading and who they are chatting with.

Dude, they will just get pummeled on the school oval, or on the bus like it was back in my day.

(And they all find a way around it anyway... TOR, VPNs or whatever)

Your last paragraph is very pertinent however. Parents are the ones who should parent, not the government.

 

[wayneL]

Even eKaren is equivocating about this.

 

[The Triangle]

This forum is basically my own social media interaction. I don't care about X, Facebook, Instagram etc. I don't know how they intend that people confirm their ages. Do we need to do it every time we log on?

If it becomes too much of a hassle then I probably just won't bother.

Joe may have some answers.

Exactly That's what they want...social media shut down because you don't want a hassle

It's the enemy of the government

 

[The Triangle]

Dude, they will just get pummeled on the school oval, or on the bus like it was back in my day.

(And they all find a way around it anyway... TOR, VPNs or whatever)

Your last paragraph is very pertinent however. Parents are the ones who should parent, not the government.

Drugs, beatings, probably all reduced with social media addiction.

 

[SirRumpole]

Dude, they will just get pummeled on the school oval, or on the bus like it was back in my day.

(And they all find a way around it anyway... TOR, VPNs or whatever)

Your last paragraph is very pertinent however. Parents are the ones who should parent, not the government.

Well, I think it could be a knee jerk reaction to a small number of terrible experiences, like let's ban all cars because a few have accidents

So we should be looking at the benefits as well as the costs. Is social media overwhelmingly more good for under 16s than it is bad?

I don't know the answer, but parents should know and if the majority of them want a ban, then it should happen imo.

 

[wayneL]

Well, I think it could be a knee jerk reaction to a small number of terrible experiences, like let's ban all cars because a few have accidents

So we should be looking at the benefits as well as the costs. Is social media overwhelmingly more good for under 16s than it is bad?

I don't know the answer, but parents should know and if the majority of them want a ban, then it should happen imo.

Majority want a ban? I haven't actually seen any figures on that, do you have a link?

Notwithstanding, I am vehemently against it, not because of the principal itself, because of the tyranny that must necessarily come with it to enforce it.

 

[SirRumpole]

Majority want a ban? I haven't actually seen any figures on that, do you have a link?

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

www.pressreader.com

 

[wayneL]

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

www.pressreader.com

The Guardian. Hmmmm I would like to see sources outside of Guardian readership.

Not dissing that completely but I would just like to see other sources as well.

Additionally, I would question whether people understand more than first order thinking on this and about the full ramifications.

 

[SirRumpole]

The Guardian. Hmmmm I would like to see sources outside of Guardian readership.

Not dissing that completely but I would just like to see other sources as well.

Additionally, I would question whether people understand more than first order thinking on this and about the full ramifications.

Guardian readership?

The Guardian may have commissioned Essential polling to do the survey but that doesn't mean they just polled Guardian readers.

Anyway , I'm over 16(well over) so it doesn't affect me.

 

[macca]

Dude, they will just get pummeled on the school oval, or on the bus like it was back in my day.

(And they all find a way around it anyway... TOR, VPNs or whatever)

Your last paragraph is very pertinent however. Parents are the ones who should parent, not the government.

I am not talking from bitter experience as I was always one of the bigger kids in my class and was never really hassled much but I have always disliked bullies so maybe I am biased.

When we were kids after school we could get away from any bullies, once we got on the bus to home or at home we could forget about it until the next day.

At present, the bullies pursue their victims at all hours of the day and night, there is no let up and many teenagers simply cannot cope.

The mental damage is very obvious to those who are dealing with the victims and many will take years to recover.

NSW Govt conducted a survey recently

<<The survey, conducted between 11 August and 15 September this year, engaged more than 21,000 participants from across the state through the ‘Have Your Say’ platform.

This is the largest response to a ‘Have Your Say’ public consultation to date.

It found that 87 per cent of respondents support implementing age restrictions for social media use, with 16 being the most suggested minimum age.

This sentiment was particularly strong among parents, with 91 per cent of those with children aged 5-17 advocating for age limits.>>

Survey highlights growing concerns ahead of Social Media Summit

The Minns Labor Government has released the findings of a major statewide survey, revealing widespread community concerns about the impact of social media on children, young people, and broader society.

www.nsw.gov.au

 

[Bellcose]

I am not talking from bitter experience as I was always one of the bigger kids in my class and was never really hassled much but I have always disliked bullies so maybe I am biased.

When we were kids after school we could get away from any bullies, once we got on the bus to home or at home we could forget about it until the next day.

At present, the bullies pursue their victims at all hours of the day and night, there is no let up and many teenagers simply cannot cope.

The mental damage is very obvious to those who are dealing with the victims and many will take years to recover.

One of my daughters, who is very shy, was bullied by others in her class using the internal network. At school, at home. When I observed her extremely stressed I was able to get out of her what was occurring. She opened up her school email and showed me. Hmm, all those taunts the others had sent was copied to their friends in the class.

Jolly good. Used the email to the Principle & Deputy Principal, with CC to all those kind, respectful kids and simply stated take action and if it ever happens again the matter will be referred to the police. Got some rather embarrassed replies from their parents as well.

In primary school, my son punched a kid out who has been continually harassing him. Principal had a discussion with me, in front of my son, about how unacceptable violence was. Fair enough, sir, but has my son let you know about the issue before. Yes, a few times. So why didn't you stop it before he had enough of the crap? Silence. Moved my son out of that school pretty quickly.