Censorship and Social Media

[Badger11]

Australia are doing things to restrict access to minors. The EU system is going to require even minors to be identified and monitored for everything they post. In China, apparently such monitoring of every citizen is sinister. But I guess it's fine in the EU. Australia do not monitor everyone's posting or messaging as far as I'm aware. The EU system will. One is to restrict access for minors, the other looks like an attempt to control the narrative.

A neighbour is currently advising several governments (including the Uk) and many corporates about child safety online protocols. Her opposite number in Australia is supposed to be the top person in the field and told their government not to bring in an age ban as the kids would just ignore it and find a way (they did). My neighbour is Greek and they are also planning to do the same as Australia even after she told them not to.

There isn't a simple solution, kids will always find a way around these things (it's a dare). Corporates need to do more to stop nasty stuff being available in the first place.

My neighbour pointed out that to politicians banning something is very attractive as it smacks of tough action "we care about our children". They can then move onto to the next problem. They don't want to hear someone say there is not easy one size fits all solution.

 

[ASCPFC]

A neighbour is currently advising several governments (including the Uk) and many corporates about child safety online protocols. Her opposite number in Australia is supposed to be the top person in the field and told their government not to bring in an age ban as the kids would just ignore it and find a way (they did). My neighbour is Greek and they are also planning to do the same as Australia even after she told them not to.

There isn't a simple solution, kids will always find a way around these things (it's a dare). Corporates need to do more to stop nasty stuff being available in the first place.

My neighbour pointed out that to politicians banning something is very attractive as it smacks of tough action "we care about our children". They can then move onto to the next problem. They don't want to hear someone say there is not easy one size fits all solution.

I knew the Australian process was not fully working as intended as proscription does tend to lead to people subverting it. However, I do suspect there is the will for it to work. Again, Social Media companies can monitor their own content - you sign up for that with a licence agreement. I'm not on social media at all: shock horror.
Governments monitoring everything you say at source is a little different. Clearly not to protect children, which is also clearly not at all a priority. I didn't sign up for that.

 

[Desborough Eagle]

I knew the Australian process was not fully working as intended as proscription does tend to lead to people subverting it. However, I do suspect there is the will for it to work. Again, Social Media companies can monitor their own content - you sign up for that with a licence agreement. I'm not on social media at all: shock horror.
Governments monitoring everything you say at source is a little different. Clearly not to protect children, which is also clearly not at all a priority. I didn't sign up for that.

errr Football forums are social media !

 

[ASCPFC]

errr Football forums are social media !

Indeed, in a way. I'm not sure most describe it as that but I do get your point. I'm not on Twitter, Facebook etc. Like everyone else is. I'm only on here to find out stuff about Palace really. Most else is an aside to me.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Changes are coming whatever they may be.
What would the reaction have been if Trump had been the first to ban under 16s from social media?
A. Totally supportive and appreciative.
B. Outraged at his dictatorial oppression.

What are the UK government’s plans to regulate social media for under-16s?

As Keir Starmer tells tech bosses to make their sites safer, ministers are weighing up what they can do

www.theguardian.com

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

A neighbour is currently advising several governments (including the Uk) and many corporates about child safety online protocols. Her opposite number in Australia is supposed to be the top person in the field and told their government not to bring in an age ban as the kids would just ignore it and find a way (they did). My neighbour is Greek and they are also planning to do the same as Australia even after she told them not to.

There isn't a simple solution, kids will always find a way around these things (it's a dare). Corporates need to do more to stop nasty stuff being available in the first place.

My neighbour pointed out that to politicians banning something is very attractive as it smacks of tough action "we care about our children". They can then move onto to the next problem. They don't want to hear someone say there is not easy one size fits all solution.

Are you then suggesting that the EU approach is likely to be more effective? Whilst kids will always try to find ways around restrictions having a formal ban empowers parents and schools to exercise control. It won’t be perfect but it’s better than not having one.,

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Changes are coming whatever they may be.
What would the reaction have been if Trump had been the first to ban under 16s from social media?
A. Totally supportive and appreciative.
B. Outraged at his dictatorial oppression.

What are the UK government’s plans to regulate social media for under-16s?

As Keir Starmer tells tech bosses to make their sites safer, ministers are weighing up what they can do

www.theguardian.com

If this extremely improbable event really happened it would be:-

C. Waiting for the claim of fake news to be made. There’s not a snowball’s chance in hell of him countenancing this.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

If this extremely improbable event really happened it would be:-

C. Waiting for the claim of fake news to be made. There’s not a snowball’s chance in hell of him countenancing this.

The proposition was made on the basis that it had happened. Your answer proves the point that it wouldn't have been approved so whole heartedly.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

The proposition was made on the basis that it had happened. Your answer proves the point that it wouldn't have been approved so whole heartedly.

My answer proves nothing of the sort. Should Trump, or anyone else, have an epiphany moment of sudden revelation that they have been completely wrong about something until that moment, it would be welcomed unreservedly.

I won’t be holding my breath.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

My answer proves nothing of the sort. Should Trump, or anyone else, have an epiphany moment of sudden revelation that they have been completely wrong about something until that moment, it would be welcomed unreservedly.

I won’t be holding my breath.

Our government has rejected the idea twice. Are they completely wrong?