| Social media ban for under 16’s 08:16 - Jun 15 with 14984 views | loftboy |
Personally I agree with it. But is it going to be easy to monitor, of course it isn’t. |  |
| |  |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:23 - Jun 16 with 1412 views | kensalriser |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 23:28 - Jun 15 by BlackCrowe |
I think i'm generally for this. But it's a bit odd that not all social media platforms have been banned eg. Blue Sky |
About as much point banning Bluesky for under 16s as there would be banning Gardener's World. Less, actually, as garden tools can be dangerous. |  |
| |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:41 - Jun 16 with 1355 views | Ned_Kennedys |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 11:11 - Jun 15 by nadera78 |
16 year olds will be ale to vote but have restrictions on their social media usage. That's bonkers. |
It’s bonkers that under 18s could be allowed to vote: on the whole they’ll be clueless about adult matters. |  | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:54 - Jun 16 with 1327 views | willesdenr |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:41 - Jun 16 by Ned_Kennedys |
It’s bonkers that under 18s could be allowed to vote: on the whole they’ll be clueless about adult matters. |
Could say the same for quite a few in their twenties. |  | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 13:06 - Jun 16 with 1266 views | TheChef |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:54 - Jun 16 by willesdenr |
Could say the same for quite a few in their twenties. |
Could say the same for most politicians  |  |
| |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 13:19 - Jun 16 with 1209 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:23 - Jun 16 by kensalriser |
About as much point banning Bluesky for under 16s as there would be banning Gardener's World. Less, actually, as garden tools can be dangerous. |
The intimation is that Bluesky is some kind of dangerous liberal / left wing platform.
It's just as shit as the rest of them, full of Crypto bots and sex scammers. |  | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 13:35 - Jun 16 with 1173 views | DiggertheMole |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:20 - Jun 15 by daveB |
They can't can't smoke, drink or drive a car |
But in certain U S states they can drive and, more worryingly, possess a firearm. As a father of three and former teacher, I approve of the move and see objections such as that children will find a way around it as defeatist. Restrictions on , alcohol and tobacco have both been enforced but there are ways around getting a drink whenever you want or buying cigarettes when you are legally too young. This does not stop the initial objective: to discourage under-age drinking and to reduce health issues connected with it. In the same way, smoking is now far less prevalent than it was when I was growing up. The idea of banning smoking in pubs, for instance, produced hysterical jeremiads about the end of civilisation and the nanny state - pretty groundless. People (and I include children seeing as teaching them has been my life) will get used to it and the use of Social Media for youngsters will become the norm. No one expects pubs to be open all night (unless during the World Cup or when Bobby Zamora scores at Wembley), people no longer light up their fags in The Rose and Crown and we now have seemingly endless TV football when it was initially regarded as impossible (not so sure about SKY!). Unlimited Social Media does more harm than good amongst the young. | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:00 - Jun 16 with 1111 views | Sonic_Hoop |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:41 - Jun 16 by Ned_Kennedys |
It’s bonkers that under 18s could be allowed to vote: on the whole they’ll be clueless about adult matters. |
I'm not so sure. If we actually taught government & politics at GCSE alongside letting post 16 year olds vote, we might get more engagement with our political process. |  | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:05 - Jun 16 with 1102 views | daveB |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 12:54 - Jun 16 by willesdenr |
Could say the same for quite a few in their twenties. |
could say the same for any age, some right morons in all age groups |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:08 - Jun 16 with 1082 views | R_from_afar |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 09:40 - Jun 16 by TwoHalves |
‘Unworkable’ seems to be a common theme running through this debate, but, as someone once said, ‘Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good’. |
Nice quote, by Voltaire, as it happens, although I am not sufficiently well read to have known that previously  . |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:52 - Jun 16 with 1034 views | TwoHalves |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:08 - Jun 16 by R_from_afar |
Nice quote, by Voltaire, as it happens, although I am not sufficiently well read to have known that previously . |
Think I probably nicked it off James O’Brien, TBF. Might just check out this Voltaire chap now though. | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 15:00 - Jun 16 with 1013 views | kensalriser |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:05 - Jun 16 by daveB |
could say the same for any age, some right morons in all age groups |
Ignorant til I die
I'm ignorant til I die
I know I am I'm sure I am
I'm ignorant til I die | |
| |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 15:28 - Jun 16 with 992 views | Maggsinho |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:00 - Jun 16 by Sonic_Hoop |
I'm not so sure. If we actually taught government & politics at GCSE alongside letting post 16 year olds vote, we might get more engagement with our political process. |
I did A Level History including Russia from 1815-1945, as part of it we studied the relevant political theories to understand the revolution. Our local Tory MP came to visit and nearly had an aneurysm when the teacher told him we were learning Marxism. |  | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 16:11 - Jun 16 with 948 views | TwoHalves |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:00 - Jun 16 by Sonic_Hoop |
I'm not so sure. If we actually taught government & politics at GCSE alongside letting post 16 year olds vote, we might get more engagement with our political process. |
We did British Constitution at O-Level (bit of a misnomer, really, as we don’t have a ‘constitution’ as such) and British Government and Political System at A-Level. No idea if it’s a thing these days. Fifty years ago almost to the day. That’s a sobering thought. | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 16:31 - Jun 16 with 917 views | flynnbo |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 14:52 - Jun 16 by TwoHalves |
Think I probably nicked it off James O’Brien, TBF. Might just check out this Voltaire chap now though. |
Had to study 18th century literature as part of my French degree to be candide. |  | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 16:49 - Jun 16 with 894 views | hubble |
This is a gross intrusion and majorly ill-thought-out autocratic move from our increasingly autocratic government who will soon attempt to demand that you have digital ID to access just about anything - not just kids - all of us.
And while kids in China, for example, are studying all the latest thinking in AI and everything else, this government will demand that even 16 or 17 year olds, who are choosing to accelerate their own learning by watching YouTube, sometimes all night (for example), will be digitally nannyed to bed at 10pm. Dumbed down and lagging behind while others leap ahead.
Sure, there are insane and massive problems with social media and kids and how they access it, but this law is not the solution. To truly tackle the problem is huge, of course, because it means going to the root of all sorts of issues (parenting, social cohesion, the degradation of morality - a big philosophical debate to be had there - and how society seems to be polarising and simultaneously disintegrating.. etc. etc.) whilst at the same time allowing young people to benefit from the incredible learning potential the internet brings. And it's not me saying this; I am merely paraphrasing what an incredibly intelligent young woman I know said about this law.
The father of the young woman who is cited as the progenitor of this law described it as a sledgehammer to crack a walnut and he's not wrong. I think the onus on us as parents is to keep our children informed and aware, not to proscribe and prohibit. Yes: limitations and boundaries are essential too. How do we balance all of this? We have to give our kids the right information and tools to navigate this rapidly evolving world. We have to give them the best chance. So how do we limit their access to the welter of dark shit that's out there? I don't think we can, but we can teach them self-defence (both physical and mental). But for me this is an authoritarian attempt at controlling the narrative and what kids can learn and where they get their information from. Schools are already far too politicised. Kids need alternatives and alternative views to grow properly and heathily. [Post edited 16 Jun 16:50]
|  |
| |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 16:56 - Jun 16 with 886 views | TwoHalves |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 16:31 - Jun 16 by flynnbo |
Had to study 18th century literature as part of my French degree to be candide. |
Took me less than 30 seconds to get that thanks to Big Tech. And therein lies the dilemma. | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:02 - Jun 16 with 864 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 16:49 - Jun 16 by hubble |
This is a gross intrusion and majorly ill-thought-out autocratic move from our increasingly autocratic government who will soon attempt to demand that you have digital ID to access just about anything - not just kids - all of us.
And while kids in China, for example, are studying all the latest thinking in AI and everything else, this government will demand that even 16 or 17 year olds, who are choosing to accelerate their own learning by watching YouTube, sometimes all night (for example), will be digitally nannyed to bed at 10pm. Dumbed down and lagging behind while others leap ahead.
Sure, there are insane and massive problems with social media and kids and how they access it, but this law is not the solution. To truly tackle the problem is huge, of course, because it means going to the root of all sorts of issues (parenting, social cohesion, the degradation of morality - a big philosophical debate to be had there - and how society seems to be polarising and simultaneously disintegrating.. etc. etc.) whilst at the same time allowing young people to benefit from the incredible learning potential the internet brings. And it's not me saying this; I am merely paraphrasing what an incredibly intelligent young woman I know said about this law.
The father of the young woman who is cited as the progenitor of this law described it as a sledgehammer to crack a walnut and he's not wrong. I think the onus on us as parents is to keep our children informed and aware, not to proscribe and prohibit. Yes: limitations and boundaries are essential too. How do we balance all of this? We have to give our kids the right information and tools to navigate this rapidly evolving world. We have to give them the best chance. So how do we limit their access to the welter of dark shit that's out there? I don't think we can, but we can teach them self-defence (both physical and mental). But for me this is an authoritarian attempt at controlling the narrative and what kids can learn and where they get their information from. Schools are already far too politicised. Kids need alternatives and alternative views to grow properly and heathily. [Post edited 16 Jun 16:50]
|
Modern society doesn't allow for the provision of good parenting for most of us.
How is a single Mum with three jobs supposed to monitor her 15 year old 24 hours a day?
We need to value parenting as work like the scandis do, even if it doesn't deliver profit for anyone directly. [Post edited 16 Jun 17:06]
| | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:12 - Jun 16 with 854 views | TwoHalves |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 16:49 - Jun 16 by hubble |
This is a gross intrusion and majorly ill-thought-out autocratic move from our increasingly autocratic government who will soon attempt to demand that you have digital ID to access just about anything - not just kids - all of us.
And while kids in China, for example, are studying all the latest thinking in AI and everything else, this government will demand that even 16 or 17 year olds, who are choosing to accelerate their own learning by watching YouTube, sometimes all night (for example), will be digitally nannyed to bed at 10pm. Dumbed down and lagging behind while others leap ahead.
Sure, there are insane and massive problems with social media and kids and how they access it, but this law is not the solution. To truly tackle the problem is huge, of course, because it means going to the root of all sorts of issues (parenting, social cohesion, the degradation of morality - a big philosophical debate to be had there - and how society seems to be polarising and simultaneously disintegrating.. etc. etc.) whilst at the same time allowing young people to benefit from the incredible learning potential the internet brings. And it's not me saying this; I am merely paraphrasing what an incredibly intelligent young woman I know said about this law.
The father of the young woman who is cited as the progenitor of this law described it as a sledgehammer to crack a walnut and he's not wrong. I think the onus on us as parents is to keep our children informed and aware, not to proscribe and prohibit. Yes: limitations and boundaries are essential too. How do we balance all of this? We have to give our kids the right information and tools to navigate this rapidly evolving world. We have to give them the best chance. So how do we limit their access to the welter of dark shit that's out there? I don't think we can, but we can teach them self-defence (both physical and mental). But for me this is an authoritarian attempt at controlling the narrative and what kids can learn and where they get their information from. Schools are already far too politicised. Kids need alternatives and alternative views to grow properly and heathily. [Post edited 16 Jun 16:50]
|
Fair play, Hubble. I think you’re essentially arguing for critical thinking (correct me if I’m wrong). One (genuine) question I have, simply because I’m an old git for whom the care home is closer than the 6th Form, concerns your assertion that ‘schools are already far too politicised’.
Not saying they are, not saying they’re not. Just interested in digging down into that a bit more (I know, ‘digging down’). | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:12 - Jun 16 with 845 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:12 - Jun 16 by TwoHalves |
Fair play, Hubble. I think you’re essentially arguing for critical thinking (correct me if I’m wrong). One (genuine) question I have, simply because I’m an old git for whom the care home is closer than the 6th Form, concerns your assertion that ‘schools are already far too politicised’.
Not saying they are, not saying they’re not. Just interested in digging down into that a bit more (I know, ‘digging down’). |
Spoiler: They definitely aren't. | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:16 - Jun 16 with 841 views | hubble |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:02 - Jun 16 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Modern society doesn't allow for the provision of good parenting for most of us.
How is a single Mum with three jobs supposed to monitor her 15 year old 24 hours a day?
We need to value parenting as work like the scandis do, even if it doesn't deliver profit for anyone directly. [Post edited 16 Jun 17:06]
|
Sure, I don't disagree. Parents need support. But parenting should be down to parents, not the government.
But you also speak of the far wider malaise in our society, where people live such broken alienated lives without the support of natural family and tribal systems. We're now almost fully broken from the societies that preceded us in terms of social cohesion, which in term stemmed from strong community. Of course there are still strong threads of community running through our society (this site is a good example), because we're tough survivors - and we will find a way to commune, no matter what... but for me our entire value system needs resetting, if we're going to stand a chance. | |
| |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:20 - Jun 16 with 834 views | TwoHalves |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:12 - Jun 16 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Spoiler: They definitely aren't. |
That’s an early lead for the Nays, then. Can the Yeas recover from this setback? | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:24 - Jun 16 with 817 views | hubble |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:12 - Jun 16 by TwoHalves |
Fair play, Hubble. I think you’re essentially arguing for critical thinking (correct me if I’m wrong). One (genuine) question I have, simply because I’m an old git for whom the care home is closer than the 6th Form, concerns your assertion that ‘schools are already far too politicised’.
Not saying they are, not saying they’re not. Just interested in digging down into that a bit more (I know, ‘digging down’). |
Well I can give you an example: Some time ago we were running a young person's literature prize at a book festival I'm involved with. We had entries (on a theme) from 5 local schools. 4 of the schools' entries were wonderfully random, anarchic, creative and different in the ways they covered the theme. But from one school (which I knew well as friends had kids there) and I knew was already heavily politicised (and making unwarranted major decisions about kids lives without the right to do so, for example allowing a child to say they were of a different gender or had a different name without consulting the parents first)... all of their entries were almost identical. Every child had turned the theme into a political issue; in this case they all referenced either gender or racism or both in their poems. These were 9 year olds. And I know that this is far from an isolated case. That's what I am referencing. | |
| |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:40 - Jun 16 with 784 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:16 - Jun 16 by hubble |
Sure, I don't disagree. Parents need support. But parenting should be down to parents, not the government.
But you also speak of the far wider malaise in our society, where people live such broken alienated lives without the support of natural family and tribal systems. We're now almost fully broken from the societies that preceded us in terms of social cohesion, which in term stemmed from strong community. Of course there are still strong threads of community running through our society (this site is a good example), because we're tough survivors - and we will find a way to commune, no matter what... but for me our entire value system needs resetting, if we're going to stand a chance. |
You are suggesting a political solution while denouncing politics.
This is the hypocrisy of libertarianism. | | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:44 - Jun 16 with 779 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:24 - Jun 16 by hubble |
Well I can give you an example: Some time ago we were running a young person's literature prize at a book festival I'm involved with. We had entries (on a theme) from 5 local schools. 4 of the schools' entries were wonderfully random, anarchic, creative and different in the ways they covered the theme. But from one school (which I knew well as friends had kids there) and I knew was already heavily politicised (and making unwarranted major decisions about kids lives without the right to do so, for example allowing a child to say they were of a different gender or had a different name without consulting the parents first)... all of their entries were almost identical. Every child had turned the theme into a political issue; in this case they all referenced either gender or racism or both in their poems. These were 9 year olds. And I know that this is far from an isolated case. That's what I am referencing. |
1 in 5 schools does not represent the over politicisation of education does it?
What was the theme out of interest?
Edit: Sorry Hubble I feel like i'm on your case, but it's not personal. [Post edited 16 Jun 17:53]
| | | |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:53 - Jun 16 with 765 views | hubble |
| Social media ban for under 16’s on 17:40 - Jun 16 by BazzaInTheLoft |
You are suggesting a political solution while denouncing politics.
This is the hypocrisy of libertarianism. |
What political solution am I suggesting?
What version of libertarianism are you referring to? It's not a fixed ideology. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.