The major parties versus social media

[Bunk Moreland]

Let’s get one thing straight… politicians (particularly the major parties) despise social media.

Part of their traditional business model is having quasi-control over the corporate media through cost relationships and deals, which allows them to impact what gets reported and how.

The LNP are the most shameless with their media department (NewsCorp), but Labour engage in it too.

Being one of the first (democratic) countries on earth to attempt that horrific news bargaining code just shows how obsessed Australian politicians are with the issue. Never mind the threats by social media to leave Australia - that’s exactly what they want!

I see Albo is now engaging in this type of shit under the oh-so-honourable cover of “anti-bullying”. Politicians LOVE pulling out this anti-bullying message as a stick to belt social media with.i get it’s real and greater measures are required - greater parental supervision and visibility, mostly - but I just cannot trust any major party politician on any social media issue. Their aim is to weaken and kill democratised information sharing.

Anthony Albanese says children under 16 should be banned from social media

PM backs campaign calling for minimum age to be raised from 13, saying impact of platforms can be ‘devastating’

www.theguardian.com

Interesting that one major politician did the opposite… Dan Andrews. He did a lot through social media in a strategy of talking directly to people and cutting out the traditional media. They hated him for it, but it worked. There were plenty of attacks about how he has a massive staff managing social media.

As opposed to what? Maintaining corrupt pal-ly relationships with media giants behind closed doors?

Why don’t more politicians go with the Andrews strategy, given its success? Do they not have the stomach for three years of relentless hate and attacks, only to be vindicated at the ballot box? Sounds cowardly but can’t say I don’t understand that, it would be horrible. We’ve never seen a sustained media attack in this country like the one Andrews endured. It was grotesque.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Here they go… they’ll ban it outright if they can

Losing control of the media is an existential threat to the major parties

 

[kickazz]

You make some really good points, especially about the need for these fogies to actually embrace social media, and the consequences (ballot box vs MSM treatment) of doing so.

Then there is that other side though - MSM, while often biased, is subject to norms of factual reporting.

Social media on the other hand isn't really. And it has enabled the growth of the far right, sov cits, and cooker mentality more generally.

India's recent elections were plagued with deep fakes on social media.
MSM's deception of the public has been more of a slow game.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Here they go… they’ll ban it outright if they can

Losing control of the media is an existential threat to the major parties

While I don't necessarily disagree with your assertion about politicians wanting control over the media, I certainly don't think this move is part of a sinister ploy to take down social media. The negative impacts that unrestrained access to social media is having on young people is well documented.

 

[kickazz]

Replace the 'like' reaction with a "this sounds like bullshit" for a couple of years might do the trick.

 

[faible]

While I don't necessarily disagree with your assertion about politicians wanting control over the media, I certainly don't think this move is part of a sinister ploy to take down social media. The negative impacts that unrestrained access to social media is having on young people is well documented.

When Dutton is behind it too you know it’s not about the mental health impacts of social media on kids.

The idea sounds fine in theory, until you realise every single person in Australia will need to provide some form of digital identity verification to prove they’re over age, not just kids.

And there we have it, digital ID. Metadata collection on steroids. No wonder Dutton is a fan.

 

[E Shed]

I’m sure it will be just as effective as stopping underage drinking & weed.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

They really don't understand estimate young people.

When I was in high school some kid broke the whole school computer network. This was 2009.

 

[Gough]

Social media looks like being scapegoat for the riots in England. Those riots weren't taking place in Tunbridge Wells or High Wycombe, they happened in towns that have been ignored by both the Tories and Labour for generations leaving then ripe for the picking by the far right. But the Daily Mail will bang on about the dreaded social meejia.

 

[Cmarsh]

Populist move to capatalise on faux outrage by the SA government.

'Big, massive deterrent': Social media companies could face fines for allowing kids under 14 on their platforms

Social media giants would be forced to ban children under the age of 14 from their platforms or face hefty penalties, under proposed laws in South Australia that could be replicated in other states.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Gough]

Populist move to capatalise on faux outrage by the SA government.

'Big, massive deterrent': Social media companies could face fines for allowing kids under 14 on their platforms

Social media giants would be forced to ban children under the age of 14 from their platforms or face hefty penalties, under proposed laws in South Australia that could be replicated in other states.

www.abc.net.au

You can be responsibe enough to to jail at ten but you can't have a Facebook account until you're in you're teens. Ffs.

 

[Rob R]

Populist move to capatalise on faux outrage by the SA government.

'Big, massive deterrent': Social media companies could face fines for allowing kids under 14 on their platforms

Social media giants would be forced to ban children under the age of 14 from their platforms or face hefty penalties, under proposed laws in South Australia that could be replicated in other states.

www.abc.net.au

Pointless legislation that would never result in a prosecution so it is just an expensive gesture.

Education is the key here starting early about the risks of social media.and how to respond/avoid the threats on line eg. scammers, bullies, extortion, theft, fake news, foreign government influence and data collection etc

On SM-A136B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[kickazz]

Pointless legislation that would never result in a prosecution so it is just an expensive gesture.

Education is the key here starting early about the risks of social media.and how to respond/avoid the threats on line eg. scammers, bullies, extortion, theft, fake news, foreign government influence and data collection etc

On SM-A136B using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah agreed.

I did read an interesting phrase - it's not about giving kids access to social media, its about giving social media companies access to our kids. This was mentioned more in the context of the addiction side of things.

Many social media CEOs don't let their kids have it.

 

[Seeds]

Another terrible policy by the albanese government. Can he stop with these rubbish policies and do something good? Like fix the housing crisis with big policy changes. And on misinformation and predatory behaviour on social media something absolutely needs to be done. But its not ban teens access. Thats not fixing the problem. Its just penalising young people because you wont actually try to fix the problem.

The following article makes some good points even if it bizarely thinks young people are gathering on Buffy the vampire slayer forums. Yes it is still the greatest show that ever lived. But only us millenials get it. Gen z have zero interest.

A social media ban won’t keep my teenagers safe – it just takes away the place they love | Anna Spargo-Ryan

Even with a ban, gen alpha will find a way to connect with people online. It’s up to the platforms – and grownups – to ensure a safer internet

www.theguardian.com

 

[Cmarsh]

"Parents want their kids off social media and onto the footy field, and so do I".

lol Albo.

 

[kickazz]

"Parents want their kids off social media and onto the footy field, and so do I".

lol Albo.

Yeah this is just a dumb repeat of "they watch too much tv".

It's the misinformation and addiction that is the problem, not kids interacting and communicating

 

[Gough]

It's shooting the messenger.

 

[Roobs321]

the ‘social media’ hysteria is little different to the ‘youth crime’ one that nightly and incessantly leads 6pm bulletins, and the rationale keeps changing the goalposts and is never specific, it’s just a populist boogeyman slogan, a scapegoat curb on nontraditional media and attempt to regain power and control of the message. Less freedom, more censorship, and doesn’t dare tackle root issues with any substance. Imagine being told 10-20 years ago that social media/internet use would be like drinking/driving age in 2025, ffs. Kids are just means for rhetoric fodder and increasing surveillance (even the efforts to counter sports gambling advertising often tends to leap straight to couching itself in "think of the kids..."). Disempowering a useful tool and using ailing traditional media in campaign against it.

yet another reason to not vote ALP at next election. That footy comment from Albo

 

[Sinjin Smith]

I've just got no idea on how they plan to enforce it via technology. Meta, Google, the Chinese gov that pretty much owns tiktok, Weibu are simply not going to give two shits.

This isn't downplaying the impacts of social media but sorry its the internet, its now like TV was decades ago, a new format of information, entertainment and a multitude of services. If any of the above giants throw some age verification function in it will be cracked in 12 hours and alternatives will also pop up.

My opinion is the internet cannot be regulated, cannot be legislated. It is down to education and parents actually bringing themselves up to speed on the dangers and how they teach their kids and if they need to restrict at application or network level on their home internet breakouts.

I do not think there is any simple solution.

 

[kickazz]

I've just got no idea on how they plan to enforce it via technology. Meta, Google, the Chinese gov that pretty much owns tiktok, Weibu are simply not going to give two shits.

Exactly.

This totally smacks of some focus group / survey finding it will get a positive reaction from a key demographic, that is about all. It is not a strategy.

 

[Gough]

Exactly.

This totally smacks of some focus group / survey finding it will get a positive reaction from a key demographic, that is about all. It is not a strategy.

If it's kid's mental health that's the concern perhaps better policies around climate change, housing and higher education might be a better way of improving their anxiety rather than banning TikTok for fourteen year olds.

 

[kickazz]

If it's kid's mental health that's the concern perhaps better policies around climate change, housing and higher education might be a better way of improving their anxiety rather than banning TikTok for fourteen year olds.

Yeah true, but the aspects of SM that are deliberately addictive are having a more acute effect.

The latter two issues you raise are interesting - The Resilience Project started out with some of the more wealthy private schools in Victoria - these kids despite being very privileged were still battling with mental health issues, and there is legit evidence pointing to SM addiction. I do not want to throw the baby out with the bathwater here, but anyone who thinks the status quo is ok I'm not sure really knows what's going on out there.

And any conversation about banning TikTok should focus on the game the CCP are playing, seems we've all conveniently forgotten about that.

 

[Sinjin Smith]

If it's kid's mental health that's the concern perhaps better policies around climate change, housing and higher education might be a better way of improving their anxiety rather than banning TikTok for fourteen year olds.

I am no means trying to downplay the issues you are raising but I don't think they are the scope for this supposed "fix". It seems to be more on content influencing kids on fashion, trends (how you are supposed to look or weigh, what shiny new things you need to have or wear) which in turn causes depression and anxiety along with nutjob extremist groups going on recruiting sprees.

Either way I do agree Albo probably should look at issues he may be actually capable of providing better outcomes (climate change, Cost of living, cost of education etc) rather than what is essentially another "look at me and my concern for your youngins).

 

[Fire]

Sigh... why is it the ALP that always **** around with internet censorship? And in a way that's both i.possible to enforce but requires registration and tracking.

They made me vote for Abbott in 2010. ****ing Abbott.

 

[Gough]

I am no means trying to downplay the issues you are raising but I don't think they are the scope for this supposed "fix". It seems to be more on content influencing kids on fashion, trends (how you are supposed to look or weigh, what shiny new things you need to have or wear) which in turn causes depression and anxiety along with nutjob extremist groups going on recruiting sprees.

Either way I do agree Albo probably should look at issues he may be actually capable of providing better outcomes (climate change, Cost of living, cost of education etc) rather than what is essentially another "look at me and my concern for your youngins).

If the government is happy for ten year olds to go to jail and for gambling ads to push them towards betting, I'm going to remain a touch cynical about the motives here. It feels like they're happy for Zuckerberg and Musk to be the villains while entrenched interests can continue on untouched.