Starmer’s plan to ban under 16’s from social media

Cossy

Mamie

I think people saying "it won't work" need to reflect on what they would do instead.
I would say that you have to attack this problem from all sides. Tackling the tech companies, banning social media as much as you can, continuing to educate children and parents of the dangers (and yes schools already do this), identifying and providing support to the vulnerable.
It isn't something to provide another cheap shot at Keir Starmer, it is a serious issue.

I said I didn’t think it would work, I said why, I said what I thought would work and I didn’t use it as an opportunity to slate with our PM or leader of the opposition!

I wasn't talking about your post Cossy.

Mamie

I think people saying "it won't work" need to reflect on what they would do instead.
I would say that you have to attack this problem from all sides. Tackling the tech companies, banning social media as much as you can, continuing to educate children and parents of the dangers (and yes schools already do this), identifying and providing support to the vulnerable.
It isn't something to provide another cheap shot at Keir Starmer, it is a serious issue.

Very few posters who are against this are offering alternative ideas. Going after the tech companies is cloud cuckoo land given their vast wealth and complete lack of any morals or ethics. The more anti Starmer a pos is the less facts and information is contained in the post.

I am for it to a point, but I think it will backfire, because I don’t think the sixteen year olds (if that comes in will want to vote for labour & are more likely vote reform, or restore.
But yes our children do need protecting from on line trolls & bullies.
Gosh I would hate to be young in this day & age. Much better back in the day when we didn’t have smart phones imo.

Will it make it easier for tech companies to put out poor material, using the argument, 'well, under 16's are not supposed to be watching it'.
That's one of my concerns.
Good of KS and KB to be trying it.
Time, as always, will tell.

Mamie

I think people saying "it won't work" need to reflect on what they would do instead.
I would say that you have to attack this problem from all sides. Tackling the tech companies, banning social media as much as you can, continuing to educate children and parents of the dangers (and yes schools already do this), identifying and providing support to the vulnerable.
It isn't something to provide another cheap shot at Keir Starmer, it is a serious issue.

I said I didn’t think it would work, I said why, I said what I thought would work and I didn’t use it as an opportunity to slate with our PM or leader of the opposition!

I think people saying "it won't work" need to reflect on what they would do instead.
I would say that you have to attack this problem from all sides. Tackling the tech companies, banning social media as much as you can, continuing to educate children and parents of the dangers (and yes schools already do this), identifying and providing support to the vulnerable.
It isn't something to provide another cheap shot at Keir Starmer, it is a serious issue.

Jaxjacky

I think it’s a welcome start that can be adapted over time, better than doing nothing.
Apparently a lot of tech companies did not delete the under 16’s accounts in Australia, they and new users couldn’t register new accounts though.

How would the tech companies have known who was under 16? There’s no age verification on most of these sites? Surely this would have been a parental responsibility?

We’ve not even been told how the new age verification will work? These are my points, child A is 16, she has an account and she’s had her age verified via ID (not sure what ID though)

Child B, is 17 and doesn’t need verification? Is this how it’ll work? What’s to stop Child C using Child B’s date of birth?

I guess what I’m saying without parents being incredibly vigilant (or as my kids would say “nosy”) and checking their kids phones every week it’s almost impossible.

Cossy I totally agree, this so called ban is a knee jerk reaction to something which needs serious thought.

It is the tech company’s and games makers which need to get their houses in order.

Tuliptree

Cossy

Just heard on BBC News that in Australia 7 out of 10 under 16 were still accessing the banned sites!

Well that’s 3/10 not so it’s a start

I agree. I still think parents have a much larger part to play. They are these kids guardians.

I’m really not knocking the idea, of the good intentions nor the reasons for trying this, I’m simply a realist.

In this instance I’d really like to be proved to be wrong and that it is a roaring success.

nanna8

If it saves one kid from depression and suicide it is worth it in my book. Easy to scoff and of course a lot will get round it but the fact that parents are encouraged to support it has won me round personally. I thought it was a rubbish idea originally but results have changed my mind.

I’m no scoffing, I applaud the idea, I’m aware enough though of both kids nowadays and social media and the tech side to know this blanket ban is unworkable.

Keir

I think it’s a welcome start that can be adapted over time, better than doing nothing.
Apparently a lot of tech companies did not delete the under 16’s accounts in Australia, they and new users couldn’t register new accounts though.

Good luck Kier. I don't believe it'll work.

Watch out, I’ll be supporting your zombie next ! 😀😀😀

David49

It should have been done years ago 90% of parents is pretty conclusive, there should also be a ban on smartphones for children.
There should also be a general restriction on porn and other unpleasant material online.

How would that help? Most “children” access online services via their games consoles. Gone are the days when games came on hard copy. Games are all downloaded now and unless good parental controls are implemented messaging services are readily available. Children also have tablets and laptops and especially at Secondary School from Year 7, but in some Primary Schools, homework is set online.

Outright “bans” rarely work. If they did we’d have no drugs at all and no underage drinking.

Accountability from all adults and education is the key.

Safeguarding is everyone’s responsibility.

I do applaud KS and KB, however, so much more is required.

I'd like to see it working, but I doubt it will

If it saves one kid from depression and suicide it is worth it in my book. Easy to scoff and of course a lot will get round it but the fact that parents are encouraged to support it has won me round personally. I thought it was a rubbish idea originally but results have changed my mind.

Cossy

Just heard on BBC News that in Australia 7 out of 10 under 16 were still accessing the banned sites!

Well that’s 3/10 not so it’s a start

Good luck with that Sir Keir.

If only you pursued NHS waiting times with such rabid determination.

Also just heard that what the sites themselves wanted the hardware, ie phones, tablets, games consoles, etc etc to be hardwired and age related criteria actually on the devices so that banned apps couldn’t even be downloaded onto these devices (seems like a great idea) but apparent all of this sites are tasked with adding in age verification to their software so on registration age would be verified.

Just heard on BBC News that in Australia 7 out of 10 under 16 were still accessing the banned sites!

There’s another point about all of this, older siblings. I know from bitter experience, with our last three only a very few years apart, I had three under 5, it’s very hard to stop child number one at 16, not showing child number two at 14 what they are looking at online.

Why are 17 year olds not protected? Some 14 year olds are more savvy and clued up than some 16 year olds.

Badly thought out! This awful Pandora’s box is now open, parents and tech companies need to be far far more accountable and parents need to be far more savvy and clued up.

I was so lucky, I worked in IT around the time the Internet was made available to us all, I had a ton of training. I was also the safeguarding school governor at our younger children’s schools so attended and rolled out a ton of Internet safety training.

Our youngest child is only 24 so it was all pretty relevant.

Doodledog

I understand that WhatsApp is not included in the ban. I may be wrong, but I'd have thought that any bullying etc would be likely to be done via that, rather than in more public places such as FB. I don't know many people of that sort of age though, so I'm not well-placed to know.

Probably keeping children off TikTok and the like is probably a good thing, though. The trouble is, areas such as SM evolve all the time, so rules set now will be out of date very soon.

I think you’re right, Doodledog
Messaging apps including WhatsApp are among the more potentially dangerous aspects of SM.
The teen killers of Brianna Ghey plotted via messages.
The TB that made my grandchild’s life a misery used messaging.
I don’t have statistics, but observations on public transport and in cafés shows far more children messaging than playing games.
How are they going to stop/ monitor that?

nanna8

They have had quite a bit of tv coverage about this here and some kids are actually benefitting from it and playing more sport and getting involved in more outdoor activities. That works here because ,mostly, we have sunshine and good weather. Whether it would work in colder places I am not so sure.worth a go,though, isn’t it ?

That’s parents responsibility to decided how that time will be spent.

Nothing to say they won’t simply be online streaming movies etc.

Both KS and KB fully support this.

As a mother and grandmother I like the idea, but feel it’s naive and unrealistic.

When fb first emerged it was aimed at 18+ students.
When registering initially your date of birth had to be entered, but not in any way confirmed or verified.

How will you keep teens under 16 off these sites? Almost all teens have smartphones, laptops or tablets (many will have all three)

What I would much have preferred is:-

More accountability to those owning the websites/streaming services to monitor and stop anything within their sites which might be consider a danger to anyone.

Responsibility to parents to ensure their under 16’s are not spending 7+ hours a day online, by putting in controls on the wifi and mobile data.

Restrictions to the amount of time spent on any one site and warnings each hour about how long has been spent online.

How on earth is this going to be policed? Who will be penalised if a 15 year old is found on these sites? The child? The parents? The site owner?

I’m afraid I think this very well intentioned legislation is doomed to failure.