Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

[Pakenhamsaint]

Apologies for cringe source, but Albanese has already spoken on presumably going after VPN's:

The government clearly has no idea.

 

[The Punter]

And you think that will keep kids from accessing social media?

It'll stop them accessing it from their phone, which is a start. Easier to monitor as a parent if kids are accessing them on a computer than a phone.

Many drugs are illegal and teenagers will get their hands on them if they are sufficiently motivated anyway. Not letting your kid have a smart phone until they are 16 is not a perfect solution nor an attempt at one, but a good start IMO.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

It'll stop them accessing it from their phone, which is a start. Easier to monitor as a parent if kids are accessing them on a computer than a phone.

Many drugs are illegal and teenagers will get their hands on them if they are sufficiently motivated anyway. Not letting your kid have a smart phone until they are 16 is not a perfect solution nor an attempt at one, but a good start IMO.

It won't.

Underestimate teenagers at your own peril.

 

[The Punter]

It won't.

Underestimate teenagers at your own peril.

So if they only possess a basic phone, how do they access social media from that phone?

 

[MarcMaverick]

Its morons like Albo that is the reason that leaders like Trump exists. Burns all of his political capital on The Voice and being pro-censorship and pro-Digital ID and could very well lose the election to Dutton, who is incredibly unpopular, next May. He had all the levers in disposals a kept pulling the wrong ones.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

So if they only possess a basic phone, how do they access social media from that phone?

They won't use thier phone. They'll nick thier parents.

Again underestimate teenagers at your own peril. They're not stupid and know get around bans.

 

[swingdog]

So, they're going to include online gaming forums (arguably one of the worst sources of misogynist incel behaviour)? And kill access to a multi-billion dollar industry?

 

[adogsfan5]

Are we better off going down this stupid route or just spending money on heavy advertising around the dangers of social media on kids, to scare parents back into parent mode?

Or move on..?

 

[MarcMaverick]

Are we better off going down this stupid route or just spending money on heavy advertising around the dangers of social media on kids, to scare parents back into parent mode?

That would be some much better. Unfortunately everybody in Canberra has got dung-for-brains . And all the Aussies are extremely compliant.

 

[Not Important]

 

[Lia]

Its morons like Albo that is the reason that leaders like Trump exists. Burns all of his political capital on The Voice and being pro-censorship and pro-Digital ID and could very well lose the election to Dutton, who is incredibly unpopular, next May. He had all the levers in disposals a kept pulling the wrong ones.

Dutton is just as horrendous on censorship and digital ID. Small minded Queensland cop.

 

[MarcMaverick]

Dutton is just as horrendous on censorship and digital ID. Small minded Queensland cop.

So where to from here? Pauline Hanson's One Nation?

 

[burge13]

This is a win/win situation for Murdoch too. His papers will run laps of honour taking credit for this policy while gleefully reporting the anger surrounding it, I can't believe the government has been this stupid.

LOL, really? What's led you to believe they are anything but stupid?

 

[burge13]

"Going to prison is worse for kids than social media"

Probably, but I don't feel bad for kids who go to jail. How much shit do you need to do to end up there ffs?! We all did mental shit as kids im sure and never even got close

I actually don't think this will be that hard to implement (absolute career killer for Albo still). You show ID to your carrier to buy the phone, the carrier can have settings on the phones to block stuff as needed. They have your ID already, no use crying about privacy there. Frankly anyone posting on FB/IG etc regularly can stfu about privacy anyway

 

[JackOutback]

Albo is really fumbling any chance of a second term with nonsense like this.

Kids are smarter than people give credit for

But parents are less tech savvy than you think. Judging by the comments I see on Facebook, a lot of parents are cheering this on. Maybe this will be ineffective but we won’t know until we’ll after the election.

 

[MarcMaverick]

But parents are less tech savvy than you think. Judging by the comments I see on Facebook, a lot of parents are cheering this on. Maybe this will be ineffective but we won’t know until we’ll after the election.

Because this is giving them an out for their poor/lack-thereof parenting skills/techniques, no sense of introspection. Yay, more Govt overreach so we don't have to think or do anything for ourselves!

 

[burge13]

Because this is giving them an out for their poor/lack-thereof parenting skills/techniques, no sense of introspection. Yay, more Govt overreach so we don't have to think or do anything for ourselves!

Bingo

It's the teachers fault my kids behind at school
It's McDonald's fault my kid is overweight
It's Metas fault for my kids anxiety

Don't underestimate this countries lust for being told what to do rather than think for themselves though.

 

[MarcMaverick]

Bingo

It's the teachers fault my kids behind at school
It's McDonald's fault my kid is overweight
It's Metas fault for my kids anxiety

Don't underestimate this countries lust for being told what to do rather than think for themselves though.

The Pandemic was proof enough.

Australia: the land of the unaccountable

 

[JackOutback]

Because this is giving them an out for their poor/lack-thereof parenting skills/techniques, no sense of introspection. Yay, more Govt overreach so we don't have to think or do anything for ourselves!

I’m not arguing in support of it or suggesting it will work but it’s interesting to watch where people draw the line. No one’s complaining about alcohol restrictions, arguing it’s just ‘an out for lack of parenting, why don’t they just say no and enforce boundaries’. Oh , but alcohol damages growing brains… wait. People are saying the government should be less worried about social media and more about gambling ads. Why? Just need to take a little parental responsibility, right.

We are just at the very beginning of understanding the negative health consequences of social media. Personally, I think the genie is out of the bottle. But my only point was that parents vote and a lot of them support this, so the idea it’s a vote killer may be overblown.

 

[Richard Pryor]

I’m not arguing in support of it or suggesting it will work but it’s interesting to watch where people draw the line. No one’s complaining about alcohol restrictions, arguing it’s just ‘an out for lack of parenting, why don’t they just say no and enforce boundaries’. Oh , but alcohol damages growing brains… wait. People are saying the government should be less worried about social media and more about gambling ads. Why? Just need to take a little parental responsibility, right.

We are just at the very beginning of understanding the negative health consequences of social media. Personally, I think the genie is out of the bottle. But my only point was that parents vote and a lot of them support this, so the idea it’s a vote killer may be overblown.

For me the line is fairly obviously at the enforcement level. A bottle shop doesn't keep a permanent digital copy of identification, nor does producing the ID attach your identity to the purchase in a hackable database. Likewise banning gambling advertising has no knock-on impacts. A better analogy would be if the government proposed that in order to combat underage drinking every adult had to register to go on an alcohol purchaser database via myGov in order to enter a bottle shop (or a supermarket chain with an associated bottle shop chain, considering the very loose definition the government is planning to use for social media). Similarly useless, and similarly invasive.

I feel the popular support from non-tech illiterate parents will evaporate when actual enforcement mechanisms are firmly proposed. In principle I don't think many, if any, would really have an issue with the ban (which I would argue isn't even new, since social media terms of service already "ban" underage use, albeit unenforced). I am somewhat surprised at the level of support given the unanimous mockery and rejection of Stephen Conroy's internet filter or the LNP's attempt to outlaw VPN's. I assume the majority are unaware Labor has stated their criteria for defining "social media" which actually includes the entire internet.

It is analagous to their efforts to combat disposable vapes, in which they shut down the vape stores which actually checked ID's and sold goods with verifiable information available, and achieved nothing in terms of the dodgy tobacconists selling chinese mystery juice vapes. The difference is in this case the most likely scenario of misplaced enforcement efforts would completely destroy all internet anonymity and open Australians up to mass identity theft rather than shutting down a niche industry.

Both Dutton and Albanese have spoken about going after VPN's as part of enforcement so the idea the youth argument doesn't represent a Trojan Horse for enforcement (and associated impact) holds no water for me.

 

[burge13]

I’m not arguing in support of it or suggesting it will work but it’s interesting to watch where people draw the line. No one’s complaining about alcohol restrictions, arguing it’s just ‘an out for lack of parenting, why don’t they just say no and enforce boundaries’. Oh , but alcohol damages growing brains… wait. People are saying the government should be less worried about social media and more about gambling ads. Why? Just need to take a little parental responsibility, right.

We are just at the very beginning of understanding the negative health consequences of social media. Personally, I think the genie is out of the bottle. But my only point was that parents vote and a lot of them support this, so the idea it’s a vote killer may be overblown.

Parents supporting it aren't thinking enough about how it will work. On face value it's brilliant, until you realise it's just a way for them to ram in a digital ID and more controls over everyone...

 

[peetoo]

Wondering if there’ll be a high court challenge. Students using social media discussion to prepare themselves for the real world they will face. Lots of people monetising social media.

We may not like it, but it’s the world we live in

 

[MarcMaverick]

Those who choose to sacrifice freedom for a little bit of safety deserve neither.

The Gilded Cage of Australiastan.

 

[JackOutback]

Parents supporting it aren't thinking enough about how it will work. On face value it's brilliant, until you realise it's just a way for them to ram in a digital ID and more controls over everyone...

They don’t need to force a digital ID on anyone, people have given up their information online voluntarily. The government already has your passport details, licence, home details etc. Your bank knows everything you buy because everything is paid for digitally. Every retailer you buy online from gets your details.

The same people accusing parents of being naive of the consequences are themselves naive to the current reality of technology. If your fear is governments getting your details, you’re a decade late.

 

[adogsfan5]

Parents supporting it aren't thinking enough about how it will work. On face value it's brilliant, until you realise it's just a way for them to ram in a digital ID and more controls over everyone...

Social media ban for under 16s, digital ID, looking at more ID requirements when creating social media accounts and telling us what is and what isn’t misinformation on social media.
In a time where government trust is probably at an all time low.

You’d think they’d read the room wouldn’t you?