6 News statement on social media ban
https://www.6newsau.com/post/6-news-statement-on-social-media-ban
https://www.6newsau.com/post/6-news-statement-on-social-media-ban
Comments
You though are embarrassing yourself.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/nov/25/banning-under-16s-from-social-media-may-be-unconstitutional-and-ripe-for-high-court-challenge
I don't agree with her stance but I understand it. She's had a forced choice of this or nothing.
I agree there are harms of social media but believe legislation should focus on ...
My cousin's experience with Tate-stans in her English classes convinces me something needs to be done. But I don't think this is the thing.
Algorithmic intervention...
Kids will be banned from having an account but still will be able to view content under supervision. It’s more addictive, decisive and harmful than before.
I think something needs to be done about surveillance capitalists harming our kids. I just don't think this is the thing.
It requires age-restricted social media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent under 16s from having accounts on their platform.
Regulatory guidance is to come on the how.
And don’t get me wrong, I’m an advocate for young people’s safety online. But I see this as a missed opportunity to engage with the better-if-harder challenge of universal safety that also denies some young people access to vital info and supports.
So many don't understand it's a universal age verification requirement. Legislation does not specify HOW the socials are to do it, poss every user has to identify themselves every time they visit. Goodbye privacy!
If so it will never work.
How does a kid under 16 ID themself anyway? Driver's licence?
Unless this is another lame duck "make it look like we're doing something while doing nothing" thing, where the socials will just have a tick box "I am over 16" (which some already have for 13yo).
That role will only increase in value as a result of this regulatory folly
It’s great to hear you’re not deterred
When the platforms covered are listed: X is there but not @bsky.app. Is Bsky covered too?
However the lists are only "platforms such as": is there a definitive list?
Can a minister add platforms without Parliamentary approval?
Bluesky would fall within the broad definition of age-restricted social media platform in the legislation.
Of course they can “get around” the laws. But laws help us form social norms. Kids can now get some sleep.
Parents can now say “sorry, it’s against the law”. You can have TikTok when you turn 16.
I seriously doubt the mediocre government & the equally incompetent opposition would have rush such reckless nonsense through without the behest of MSM
6 News might end up another Right Wing source.
Leo the new Josh Rogan.
But yes this legislation helps Rupert too. The reason the Duopoly is pushing it and Merde-och is in full support
https://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2024/11/17/rupert-murdochs-news-corp-set-to-make-millions-from-labors-social-media-ban-for-kids/
Note to self: Must use sarcasm font.
Agree he seems balanced.
Not that we watch it but every time she sees him she has to comment.
At 15 all my mates look like him with full beards. I just loved growing up with italians