Landmark legislation sees the Australian government committed to the novel step of child protection by banning social media for under sixteens.
So where exactly are kids supposed to go? People will go on about “they should just go outside” but kids have literally had the cops called on them for the crime of walking around their own neighborhood “unsupervised”. I’ve seen calls to ban kids from all sorts of places - planes, theme parks, restaurants, libraries. I’ve seen these “mosquito” things put up to drive kids away from public places. Kids are spending all their time on social media because they have nowhere else to go.
You can message your friends without all the misinformation and self-harm promoting algorithms
They should go the fuck outside, what you said isnt true at all. Also, kids arent buying their own phones and internet, the parents are.
I think this perspective (that teens have nothing else in their lives other than social media) is harmful. I don’t understand why they’re not able to do the same things teens did before social media…
Police being called on harmless teenagers by the same busybodies over and over again kind of sorts itself out after awhile.
This is the travel range for kids in the UK by generation. Such a map would be far worse in the US or Australia
They can’t do the same things teenagers did before because the world has been growing more and more hostile to teenagers. More places have banned kids. We have these mosquito things making noises to drive teenagers away. It’s become more difficult to get around without a car. Parents have become more helicoptery, not letting their kids out of the house. And “sorts itself out”? Here’s what happens. Some asshole calls the cops on teenagers just hanging out. The cops, with nothing better to do than harass innocent people, show up and chase them away. Now those teenagers don’t feel safe going back there, because they don’t wanna get cops coming after them. Or maybe the cops don’t stop at chasing the kids off! Maybe they get arrested for “loitering” or some nonsense. Maybe they get accused of dealing drugs because teenagers hanging around is strange and suspicious, and the cops love to frame innocent people. Cops getting called isn’t some silly and frivilous thing.
Have you actually witnessed that entire event pan out?
The police that I personally know, visit the caller and talk to them first to understand the complaint and often (but I agree not always) educate the caller that teenagers are just doing what the caller(s) did at their age… usually, there are no more calls and all groups move on with their lives.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t make headlines and it’s not emotive enough to discuss.
In my personal experience, the older generations trust the media and just believe / expect the worst will happen. Most parents, younger adults, just don’t see the problem.
Look, I don’t live in Australia, but the way you describe it makes it sound like every single person is a cunt and every place is exactly the same, urban or rural.
Tell me the places with these mosquito sounds.
Can they take public transport or their bikes? A group have their parent or other family provide rides?
Parents aren’t helicoptery enough of this is the kind of shit teens are up against day in and day out.
Here’s what happens when the cops show up to a busy body call. The cops show up, they ask what’s going on, they see nothing illegal is happening and leave. Kids continue living their lives. Can’t loiter at the park. Don’t trespass or loiter in a parking lot or other private property. If they keep calling, the cops start recognizing whose calling and stop questioning the same kids over and over. Cops always give warnings about loitering. If your police are arresting minors for loitering, you got bigger problems. Honestly, isn’t it just a ticket?
Whether or not cops are safe depends on many factors, but having the cops know where you’re kids are isn’t a terrible thing.
cops love to frame innocent people
Get off the internet and crime shows
How dangerous are the police in Australia? How many fatalities? How often?
Edit: advocating for after school programs / funding would be worthwhile. I think your perspective is exaggerated and dismissive, but we could potentially agree on this much.
So where exactly are kids supposed to go? People will go on about “they should just go outside” but kids have literally had the cops called on them for the crime of walking around their own neighborhood “unsupervised”. I’ve seen calls to ban kids from all sorts of places - planes, theme parks, restaurants, libraries. I’ve seen these “mosquito” things put up to drive kids away from public places. Kids are spending all their time on social media because they have nowhere else to go.
Outside. It may take society a bit of time to adjust, just like it took a bit of time before kids not being outside became normal, but it will happen. Kids run around my town all the time unsupervised, nobody is calling the cops, and parents are looking out for each others kids. Just because some places have gone off the deep end doesn’t mean everywhere has.
The problem is not teens accessing social media, they’re just bored or don’t know any better
The problem is what adults post on those social media.
If anything teens should have social media of their own, where no elder boomers are allowed
There was a German social network a few years ago that did exactly that (before Facebook was available in German)
They had SchülerVZ for kids/teens, then they had StudiVZ for university students and finally they had MeinVZ for adults. The problem was, that they weren’t interconnected at all apart from the option to move your account to the next platform. So if you were just starting to study but you still had friends that were in school, you could’t keep in touch with them.
Problem: Higher childhood depression rates linked to social media usage, social media caused disruption in education (like usage in schools), privacy violation of minors, etc.
An enforceable, common sense solution: Very strict privacy protection laws, that would end up protecting everybody, including minors. Better, kid friendly urban infrastructure like dedicated bike paths protected from car traffic, better pedestrian areas, parks and so on. Kids will get outside their house if there is a kid friendly outside. A greener, more human friendly outside where you can socialize with other humans would always be preferred over doom scrolling online. For the disruption in education issue, it is very education system dependent.
What solution these people came up with: Make it illegal for individuals under the age of 16 to create social media accounts. How do they enforce this? No idea. Does this solve any of the above problems? No. Is this performative? Yes.
Speaking from personal experience, social media was one of the most liberating tools for me as a kid. I lived in a shitty, conservative country and was gay. Social media told me that I wasn’t disgusting. I was always more of a lurker than a poster, so I thankfully didn’t really experience being contacted by groomers and so on. However, many of my friends who posted their images and stuff almost always got pedos in their DMs, so that’s a very real issue.
I could ask my silly little questions related to astrophysics on Reddit and get really good answers. Noone around me irl was ever interested/able to talk about stuff like this. I could explore different political ideologies, get into related servers on Discord and learn more about this. None of this was possible without social media.
Banning social media outright is such a boomer move lol. Doing so isn’t going to solve any real problems associated with childhood social media usage. It’s just going to give the jackass parents complaining about this a false sense of security, when the kids still end up suffering.
This is a false dichotomy.
You can regulate social media platforms and have great infrastructure.
Your own childhood sounds tough, but advocating for social media as a way to mitigate shitty communities is a weird take.
This is false false dichotomy.
Privacy protection laws do regulate social media.
Oh those poor kids.
I remember when we banned porn for the under 18s and now nobody under 18 can access porn.
This is my favorite argument against government regulation.
Anything not foolproof definitely isn’t worth doing at all.
Australia is the first nation to fail to ban social media for under 16s.
Now do 16+
In case you forgot, Lemmy is social media
Let’s ban centralized for profit social media.
antisocial media
Do you really want 15 year olds on lemmy?
Honestly - fine with me, tear it all down.
Sounds like youre deleting your account soon.
Goodbye.
Based on what I’ve seen over the last few years, it’s the over-16s that should probably be banned from social media.
Unenforcible Law.
Gotta require ID verifications and ban all VPNs in order to actually be enforcible.
Surely, the website owners would never sell your information, right? Right?
The ID verification is the purpose. Keeping minors off is a smokescreen, tracking every citizen on social media is the real reason for this law.
deleted by creator
Put it on the parents. That’s enforceable, and the root of the problem…
Banning the Three Letter Word is unenforceable too. If you ban Open*** and Wireguard - too bad, China has done that and people developed obfuscation methods. Even if you try to ban talking about them, they won’t go extinct. If there’s a supply, there’s a demand.
It’s still not entirely clear how the Australian government thinks they’re actually going to enforce this.
Plenty of web services already require you to state your age to use them and I believe a large majority of users just coincidentally happen to be born on January 1st, 1900 as a result.
If they’re expecting these tech companies to be gathering and storing peoples’ government ID’s, or something, somebody needs to carefully explain to them using small words why this is a monumentally stupid idea. Does something need to be done about social media addiction and the rampant sketchy behavior of the tech giants? Yes, probably. Is a blanket ban ever the actual solution to anything? No, very rarely.
It’s just apparently all anyone can come up with when they’ve got government-brain.
They’ve set it up so it’s a legal mess. The platforms aren’t given any mechanism to actually perform verifications (no double blind id system, for example) but are legally on the hook for each and every under-16 on the platforms. A quote in the article suggests it should be the app stores verifying which is even more fucking stupid.
Well, I know how that would go if I were a globe-spanning social media giant. Given that the entirety of the Australian market is roughly the size of New York state (~26 vs ~20 million people), I would say, “Nah mate, we just won’t do business in Oz anymore. Bye.”
Vanishingly few business make a “New York only” version of their product because it’s simply not worth it. Australia already suffers under this problem for a great deal of physical products. Ask any computer nerd about that, when trying to source parts and often video game titles as well. Shipping things to the Antipodes and/or dealing with Antipodean regulations is expensive, for an objectively low number of potential sales.
It would not surprise me to learn if it follows that Australia generates roughly 1.7% of the revenue for Facebook or whoever as, say, India. So in other words, bupkis.
Platforms love to use this threat… “if you regulate us we’ll just withdraw services in your jurisdiction”. They never do, and governments shouldn’t respond to threats like that in any case. If one or other platform were to restrict services in Aus, it would just increase the potential revenue for some other platform.
this isn’t for the safety of kids; it’s to eliminate the ability for queer kids to find a community.
No offence but that’s shortsighted to be generous. I feel like half of lemmy will carry on about social media being cancer, the frequent articles citing negative effects of SM on mental health and the fact that multiple social media companies are accused of propagating misinformation (Zuckerberg face sure is in lemmy a lot lately for some reason). Like Zuck has all but greenlit harassing lgbt+ people on FB and the SM ban is to stop gay kids finding a community? Please. Corporate SM is a blight and before someone says lemmy/reddit check the mod logs or the fact that lemmy only got CSAM under control relatively recently before suggesting it’s fine for kids.
In further news, millions of teenagers have become experts at vpns and bypassing online restrictions
Australia fighting the good fight to produce tech savvy youth
Now kids will be forced to hide being a victim of cyber-bullying from their parents. Great work!
If they don’t have an online presence and neither do their peers, how would they be cyber bullied?
I’m sure bullying will go on, old school, in the streets, but cyber bullying is one of the things that will go away with this
I think this is great. There are about one or two generations worth of people that had social media while being kids and I think they should stop acting as if it’s the end of the world if it would go away. I fully understand that you grew up with it and don’t know any netter but believe you me: you can do without, you can survive without, you will be better without.
Go outside, touch grass, have fun, be a kid again.
A few years ago the Australian government spent an enormous amount of money on a proposed firewall to protect the children. After years of development they were ready to pilot test their white elephant, and discovered that, on average, the Australian 12 year old could bypass it in ten minutes.
It’s unlikely that the government could even enforce an obstacle as robust as the “are you 18+” checkbox that porn sites opt in to. This new law will not have any influence on under 16s online presence.
I’m an Australian, and I don’t remember the ‘firewall’ that you’re talking about. Do you have a link or something to remind me?
This is the first result from Google. It’s I guess ancient history now being it was the labor rights push to (probably) unintentionally discredit kevin07, but internal politics aside Conroy (famous for his opposition to adult rating for videogames) was for aong time a candidate for ‘biggest piece of shit in Australian politics’. Stephen Conroy was the face of it, so search for him and firewall to your hearts content. The Alana and Madeline foundation were involved in some of the testing that damned the project, if I remember right (as if common sense hadn’t already damned it with seconds of the sales pitch).
Thanks. I do remember this now. I don’t remember it costing a lot of money, but I do remember people generally disagreeing with the idea of it - and then being amused by how it was to be implemented. And yes, to get around this filter I changed my DNS server from the ISP’s default to instead use Google’s. (This was far enough in the past that I wasn’t yet anti-google!)
Good luck with that.
It doesnt need to be 100% effective.
