The problem with social media is not necessarily the social media itself. The problem is the companies behind social media trying to maximize profits by getting the users addicted to the platform. Companies deliver content that is much more about creating engagement that generates revenue rather than keeping up with what friends are up to. It’s pretty hard find stories from your friends in the sea of suggested and promoted content. I think social media for kids would be better if had restrictions like:
Only see content from people they follow (no suggested content)
Can only follow a limited number of accounts
The social media company cannot make money from underage accounts (Cannot show ads, no selling of user data, etc.)
The kid can’t make money from the account
Parents have full access
Restrictions like that would mean that the negative effects of social media would be limited. Kids would just be more likely to just follow the accounts of their actual friends rather than influencers who are just advertising products and services. It would be less addictive since they wouldn’t be affected by algorithms designed to maximize time spent on the platform. Since the company couldn’t make money off of these accounts used by kids, they would be less incentivized to find ways to make them addicted to the platform.
You have some curious misconceptions about democratic governance … mayhaps the current US administration is weighing heavy on your judgement.
Latest polling results on the issue: 79% support.
Demographic with lowest support is with the 18-24yos at merely 72%
Bipartisan support, indeed it’s strongest support is with the opposition parties rather than the Labor government.
(respondents identifying as)
National - 88%
Liberal - 85%
Labor - 82%
Greens - 71%
Australia’s under 16yos have been silenced from political discourse with this ban?
Minecraft isn’t typically a medium for political protest on these shores.
They can still send their local MP an SMS, or send a letter, or send an email, wave a banner outside the constituency office or call in to talk-back radio. That’s what their parents do.
As soon as you say this you lose all credibility in this discussion with me. Insisting on personifying social media by reference to the despised owners of the platforms just says “I got nuthin’ so I’m going to engage in emotive ad homs”.
There are problems with social media. If you want to be convincing to an educated and thoughtful audience you are going to have to do better than resort to cheap shots.
@filmore had a good post with their reasoning and suggestions for improvement:
Limiting products with health hazards is nothing new. Social Media is a product with a speech component (among others like content consumption) which complicates the issue. If one agrees that their are health issues with SM, it’s at least reasonable to require SM products to disable the harmful, non-speech features for minors and add protections for the remaining speech features.
“I know it’s not an easy thing to implement. I think it’s a favour to the world,” he said.
On the other hand Elon Musk rather has his knickers in a squirrel grip: Musk wrote on X in response: “Dirty Sánchez is a tyrant and a traitor to the people of Spain.” About an hour and a half later, he escalated his criticism, posting on X: “Sánchez is the true fascist totalitarian.”
Give the man his due, he’s been up close and personal in this area of study and I’d reckon it’s likely he could recognise a tyrant, a traitor and a fascist embodied.
Of course; it doesn’t apply to them so why would they oppose it? Most adults are going to fall into the categories of “indifferent”, “abuser” and/or “control freak”, all of whom would either not care or favor it while the people actually affected are politically voiceless.
I also think there is an analogy to the whole 2020 Covid-decisions:
One country implemented a (somewhat) extreme position and it worked (at least there was no huge backlash) … so that is a known avenue AND precedence for other countries to walk down.
There’s nothing new about stomping on young people; they can’t vote or otherwise fight back, so they are favorite targets. The control freaks and abusers can vote, so pandering to them is more important.
