Re: Banning Social Media For Under-16s

BR wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 07:22:18 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>

Australia has put in place a law to ban access to social media for
under-16s, and New Zealand is looking to follow suit. Here is an
interview, by Samantha Hayes of Stuff, of the “Premier” (as the
Aussies insist on calling the state Chief Ministers in their
Federation -- don’t they know that “Premier” is shortened journalese
for “Prime Minister”?) of South Australia, Peter Malinauskas, the
instigator of the Aussie law
<https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360690772/one-thing-architect-australias-social-media-ban-under-16s-would-do-differently>.
>
One of our local pro-right-wing-wannabe parties insists the law would
be “unworkable”. Yes, Malinauskas admits that bans on underage
smoking, drinking and now social media are never 100% effective. But
they greatly reduce the incidence of the activity, and that is what
leads to harm reduction.
>
Certainly, relying on the social media companies to police themselves
is never going to work. Because if it had worked, we would have seen
the results, after more than 20 years of their activities. The fact
that things are, if anything, worse now than when they started, shows
the uselessness of trusting them.

Banning under 16s from social media will be impossible unless some
sort of digital ID is issued to everyone and which would be required
for internet access.

and so we march ever onward towards microchip implants

  This legislation is insidious and must be opposed
at every opportunity.
>
It is up to parents to supervise their children's online activity, not
politicians.
>
Bill.
>

>