AIBU to think the social media ban will be impossible to enforce?

[Viviennemary]

I'm not totally against this ban on social media for under 16's. but I don't see how it can be enforced. It's on BBC news now. One boy spent 14 hours a day. Another girl 9 hours. Crazy.

That’s the most unhinged argument against the social media ban I’ve read so far, well done.

People are always so extreme on here. On the other thread someone brought up the fact under 18s can’t buy alcohol or cigarettes. Social media doesn’t kill millions of people like those drugs do. Yes some incredibly sad stories exist where kids have been bullied or accessed some awful content and decided to copy whatever it was but for the most part, it’s just an app they use to communicate with their friends.

I noticed they didn’t specify precisely how they’ll verify ages. If it’s through government ID then it’s essentially backdoor digital ID which is creepy and people are naive if not concerned. If it’s facial recognition like roblox enforced a few months ago, some teens look older than their age for starters but also they could just ask parents to do it and many happily would.

I don’t understand why people think the ban will be hard to enforce. If a social media company is found to be offering accounts to under 16s the company will be in breach of the ban. If they have a 16 age limit, they won’t.

is that not straightforward enough?

The sharp rise in anxiety and depression in young people since 2010 has been linked to social media usage. Personally I'm glad it wasn't around when I was young.

That said, the price of banning it for under sixteens is surely a loss of anonymity for the rest of us, which isn't a good thing. Although in a few years, it will probably be something we all take for granted.

The current age limit for social media is 13 and yet people weren’t all up in arms when that was brought in. It will be up to the companies themselves to take reasonable steps to apply an age limit, just as it is now.

Because of it is a simple as either a child using you tube without logging in or a parent can simply log in and give access to their children, it isn’t actually a ban.

Digitalisation by the back door.

Eh drugs and alcohol don’t kill millions of teens either.

And it’s as simple as a parent giving their child an 18 rated film to watch or providing them alcohol? What’s your point?
Shit parents have always been able to circumvent age regulations, that doesn’t mean it’s not broadly beneficial as a whole.

Isn’t this ban a good thing for parents, a tool to push back at your kids when they plead for expensive phones. Teenagers now will struggle but the ones coming up behind them will have a greater experience of childhood than the present cohort. Heartening to see on the news that some kids are all for a ban, because they see themselves and their friends becoming phone zombies.

Life’s not fair.

I do very much foresee this as digital ID being sneaked in by the back door. “Digital ID is not compulsory” they will say, but the unspoken part is “but life as you KNEW it will be very inconvenient”. Like the vaccines; not compulsory, but we came dangerously close to them being a condition of being able to take part in society, as happened for a while in Austria.

What is NOT being said is what we must be vigilant about.

Can’t believe you are condoning bullying.

Re parents- sure, just as some parents give their under aged children cigarettes and alcohol. That’s not a reason not to ban their sale to under 18s.

I don’t think the ban will be 100% effective. I do think it will massively reduce SM use by teens and change social norms around time spent online. I couldn’t be more supportive.

Someone mentioned higher up the thread that schools try to ban phone use but then set homework on an app. I very much hope that changes too- schools managed to set homework perfectly well before smartphones existed. We’ve all rushed into embracing the convenience of smartphones without understanding the costs. Time to row back.

What are you talking about? Life isn’t fair, that’s the be all and end all of it.

Parents should be bringing up their children not to be bullies, rather than expect the whole world to be “fair” so others aren’t “bullied”.

I didn’t specify teens though, I said people. SM doesn’t kill millions of people like those legal drugs do so the comparison is frankly ludicrous.

It’s a ban on social media companies offering accounts to under 16s. Just like there is a ban on shops selling cigarettes to under 18s.

Enforcement is on the provider not the consumer.

Again, SM isn’t as harmful as a cigarette. People are just ridiculously extreme on here.

Honestly the notion that it’s unfair because children within the same school year have birthdays at different points and it will lead to bullying as a reason against banning social media is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve ever heard.

Alcohol sales are not done be school year. Driving age isn’t done by school year.
Age restricted movies aren’t done by school year.
Child fares on the bus aren’t done by school year.

Why on earth would wider internet access be done by school year?

Shops are banned from selling cigarettes to under 18s and are fined if they do not take reasonable steps to avoid doing so.

Social media companies will be banned from offering accounts to under 16s and will be fined if they do not take reasonable steps to avoid doing so.

Anyone who doesn’t see the analogy is just being obtuse.

But they aren’t that’s the point. Either parents are responsible enough to look after their children and monitor or they aren’t. If they are responsible then they will be monitoring, if they aren’t then they won’t care what their children is up to. The ban isn’t aimed at the first group but they are caught up in it. I am 100% sure that the older children in the year will start to post about the younger ones online knowing full well that the younger ones can’t do a thing about it.

but anyway I have now found out that there isn’t actually a ban anyway as all you have to do is just not login with an account so it’s fine. All a lot of fuss over nothing.

It doesn’t matter. Whether you like it or not, life isn’t fair. Teaching your children that will do them wonders.

The age verification process works as it worked on Roblox. The system guessed the age, if it is incorrect or you dispute it then you upload your passport.
My Daughter assumed aged by Roblox was 13, she’s 17. So uploaded ID to access her age content. DS is 11, Roblox guessed his age correctly.

I’m not deliberately being obtuse. Banning cigarettes makes sense, my DC won’t ever be able to smoke and I’m grateful for this- it is responsible for the deaths of millions of people. Social media isn’t the same animal.

My son has one of the EE SIM cards that requires a parent to ok anything they want to download so this is how we have a handle on social media at this point, he is 12. Perhaps this could be another way is that all teens should have restricted sims up to a certain age