Meta accuses Australian government of failing to consider young people’s voices with world-first social media ban
Meta accuses Australian government of failing to consider young people’s voices with world-first social media ban
One independent MP calls bill – which passed on Thursday – a ‘1970 solution for a 2024 problem’
Summary
Meta has criticized Australia’s new law banning under-16s from social media, claiming the government rushed it without considering young people’s perspectives or evidence.
The law, approved after a brief inquiry, imposes fines of up to $50 million for non-compliance and has sparked global interest as a potential model for regulating social media.
Supporters argue it protects teens from harmful content, while critics, including human rights groups and mental health advocates, warn it could marginalize youth and ignore the positive impacts of social media.
Enforcement and technical feasibility remain significant concerns.
Fuck off, Meta. My children tell me they want to try cigarettes, driving, using an excavator, and rifles and every time I fail to consider their voices. Actually, I consider it and the answer is an easy, "no." Considering the evidence, social media like FB appears to be quite deleterious to people's mental health, young people in particular.
100% - Meta's opinion on this matter is absolutely irrelevant.
I’d let them try out an excavator as long as I got a turn, too.
Human rights groups and mental health advocates have also warned it may marginalise young Australians.
On the other hand, if more governments follow suit it may force social media companies to reconsider their toxic behaviour
Pretty sure cigarettes went through the same thing. Harder to hook them when they're older if you don't hook em young.
Yeah. This rings of tobacco companies trying to convince everyone that cigarettes are good for them.
Thank you!
I didn't notice that, on my own!
_ /\ _
"considering young people's perspectives or evidence" LOL eat shit fuckerberg
last i heard, the evidence showed that fb and other social medias overrun with "influencers" provide zero benefit, but instead cause self-image problems and depression at best, completely unaddressed cyberbullying and suicide at worst.
fuck the lot of social medias. it's bad enough that grown ass adults are so addicted to it
If these bans expand to other countries there will have to be a definition of social media applied. I assume Australia already did this. Do they consider Lemmy to be social media?
I think the ban is generally a good idea but I selfishly don't want Lemmy overrun with children either.
Sysadmins & mods are exepted, right?
( that's a joke, for any sysadmins or mods
q :
: )
I use social media from time to time. The amount of misinformation that is created and spewed without consequence is really alarming. A lot of it is dangerous. People give medical advice and pretend to be doctors. That should be illegal.
If they could filter out all the garbage content and just have children cartoons, comics, food, and cute animals, I would be fine letting kids watch it from time to time.
Pretending to be a doctor is illegal.
Some ways I saw around this is by being in another country, and/or getting some bullshit PhD. I see a lot of chiropractors giving nutrition advice.
Even if they don't call themselves doctor, they will say they are a medical practitioner, or health expert because of their self published PDF book or their shitty blog.
You don't consider Lemmy social media? Honest question.
That's an actual issue I see with this law: how does one define social media? I've seen YouTube described as social media which I find highly dubious but I can't really explain why.
yt was social-media, before they ripped-out massive quantities of comments, for things like, you know,
- fact checking
- linking to Wikipedia
- not pushing the disinformation they find so profitable
- being objective
- calling-out disinformation-pushers, establishment or otherwise
Now that they've got an autodelete on any comment linking to Wikipedia, the're not really "social media" anymore, now they're "social" media, if you see the difference..
( propaganda-for-profit, & controlled, deeply. )
_ /\ _
Fuck Meta.
Fuck Meta but 16 seems a little bit old just because of the enforcement challenges. I’m not arguing social media is good for 14 and 15 year-olds. I’m just saying they’re often clever little shits who systematically test boundaries. They’re like the velociraptors in Jurassic Park.
Basically, I think a better strategy would be something like a ban for 13 and under. Then, a harm reduction strategy for 14-17 year-olds. Like maybe sequester them. They don’t want adults on their timeline anyway and (normal) adults don’t really want teens on theirs. Maybe allow them to follow approved pop stars and athletes or something but not random adults.
Basically, social media training wheels for older teens so they develop some social media literacy before they’re just tossed into the cesspool of adult social media.
Their perspective? Up until they are 18 they should listen to mama and papa. And mama and papa voted for this government and live in a country that chose this ban.
Fuck off meta.
Meta concerned with people when they can't abuse them.
And when did Meta start caring about anything but harvesting and selling data? I mean, minors can't consent to T&C (it's a contract) so minors should be using it at all.
This is worthless because it's not the children whose use of social media is destroying the world.
Well then those kids should have voted. ... Oh. ;)