AIBU to think banning social media for under-16s is a good idea?

[LizardLore]

Just being announced now - social media banned for under-16s.

My instinct is it’s great, but I am interested in other views. My kids are very small so not an issue here yet.

YABU - the ban is bad
YANBU - the ban is good

Can you explain what more data this ‘digital ID’ would hold that’s not already in place with passports, driving licences, info held on say government pension contribution account or other benefits?

Political opinions, social connections, beliefs, comms, etc.

So you trust tech companies with your data more than you trust the government?

@Changingplacewould you just use social media without a VPN giving full access to any gov over your posting?

No. I don't want the two things combined.

I don't want tech companies having full access to govt info or vice versa.

The risks should be fairly obvious?

I’m a web developer and I’ve never logged into YouTube in my life and cookies are disabled on every device in the house so that I can control which ones are used. If they want me to log in to YouTube to verify my age I’ll stop using it.

Both of my kids went from mid grades to 9s at GCSE accessing some of the superb tutorial channels - it was like having a personal tutor that never got tired or bored of explaining the same topic ad infinitum, coupled with a thorough understanding of the marking scheme and not wanting to be paid.

A kid born in September will get access to that resource in the first month of their GCSE year. A kid born after mid June will never see it in time without parents supervision. I don’t know how much time people want to spend supervising GCSE physics. And the algorithm is incredibly useful here in finding new creators that students trust.

On the other hand a kid born in September will get access to every distraction under the sun just as they start GCSE year, all wrapped up in a previously shiny ‘forbidden fruit’ wrapper. They’ll also know no-one in their class to start with and it’s easy to imagine their only choice of friends will be some older sibling of a friend, for example. And they’ll have no-one else to talk to.

Why would this be linked to the state?

the government won’t be able to access the age verification data

The government/police can ask tech platforms to pass on this information anyway, and nothing you put on social media, or anywhere online is entirely confidential - you’d be very naive to think it’s not traceable anyway.

Over and above an under 16s ban, I think a lot of adults need more digital literacy understanding, maybe bringing this all in will make a lot more people consider what they’re actually sharing online and with who.

So you won’t use a VPN and continue posting with digital ID?

Oh that edit. Ffs people are aware data is being used. You and they still post because it’s a trade off.

Exactly this. If parents took greater control and weren't so lazy about monitoring what their kids are accessing, the government wouldn't need to step in.

Whether or not I agree, it’s up to me what my daughter does, not the government. I birthed her so I’ll decide if she’s on social media not some numpty.
I honestly can’t see how they’ll enforce it….
tbh I’ve seen more adults bullying adults than I have kids on social media. The problem is humanity

Age restrictions are already in place for adult content accessed from the UK, it’s really not that hard to understand how it could be enforced.

Those restrictions mean turn on a vpn in most cases.

I think the ban is good but I also think that a ban on smart phones for under 16’s should also rolled out. A simple dumb phone is all children need.

I'm actually pro Digital ID, provided it's well considered and implemented.

But I don't think the Government are being honest about its real purpose or benefits.

Says someone living in a city, with a school in walking distance.
For rural schools (read: no mobile phone signal, public transport to school), a smartphone is absolutely necessary. Your brickphone is useless to let your parents know the train stopped unexpectedly (again) at a tiny station in the middle of nowhere and you need picking up. There is no mobile phone signal anywhere between school and your home train station.
There is however free wifi on the train, so you can actually message your parents and drop a pin to show where you are (as the station you are currently stuck at and will be for the next hours is not one your train was even supposed to stop).

I’m happy about it. Hopefully more parents will have a backbone now and not buy smartphones for their children.

But then your daughter could show her friends harmful content. The ban helps support parents that want to protect their children.

yes probably.

city based schools.

Actually they’ve all apparently clamped right down on phones. One is trialling an absolute ban on any sort of smartphone coming near school at all from y7. They’re all encouraging brick phones. (I know both teachers and parents with kids at a few of the different schools)

I have a very grumpy 13 year old who rightly points out he’s just making animations and wants to share them with the world.

Also that he has mates who look physically 17 and so would pass a visual test.

(poor lad looks still like some 10 yr olds do!)

The ban helps support parents that want to protect their children.

Parents can easily protect their children without government legislation. It’s very straightforward. Monitor their phone use, set up phones etc with a good level of protection, and say no to certain apps and gaming sites. It requires a bit of effort, but is nothing that any parent shouldn’t be doing already. If parents are unhappy with certain social media sites, why haven’t they already stopped their children from accessing them? Why haven’t they waited for the government to tell them what to do?

The ban will not stop children being able to look at others’ phones because the more irresponsible parents and children will bypass any age restriction anyway.

Can anybody answer these questions for me please

1. Does this ID requirement apply to bog standard web forums for example mumsnet?
2. Can the requirement to verify age be avoided with a VPN?

I have no interest in releasing any more personal data than I absolutely have to.

What my 13 year old did with his smartphone on friday:

• we are rural- no phone reception at school, at the station, on the train
• tree on the rail, his normal train didn’t run. no direct trains for the rest of the day. There is no phone reception at the station.
• took his smartphone, logged onto station wifi, figured out he could take a train to a different town and catch another train from there
• went on the train, which promptly broke down between two tiny stations. Finally made it into a tiny station. Still no phone reception.
• Figured out that there was a bus leaving a 10 min walk from that station. used the train wifi to get a map and walk to the bus stop.
• Kept me up to date the whole time.
• Got on the bus home, walked the last 15 min. he had phone reception for the last 20 minutes.

Good luck doing any of this with a brick phone, and trains don’t run properly at least once every 2 weeks. School isn’t actually that far away, but due to geography and traffic, its easily a 45 -60 min drive. He made it home in just under 90 minutes.

The one parent I know who wants to "protect" her child by not letting her have a phone tries to insist all her child's friends have the parents phone number in their phone and message the parent to arrange social events. I have made it clear how unacceptable this is and banned DD from having non family member adults as phone contacts. But it tells me what a weird and distorted view the "phone ban" parents have.

The truth is no one knows which sites will or will not be restricted, but I would have thought there's a good chance MN would be considered SM and may be included.

Yes a VPN would allow a user to "appear" to be in another country that may not require age verification, of course MN could decide to make age verification mandatory for all users.

Judging by the reactions so far today, this isn't going to be a vote winner like KS thought it would be. (insert U-turn here)