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

GrannyGravy13

Mamie

One of the recent Apple updates required proof of being 18 by passport, driving licence or credit card (not debit cards because you don't have to be 18) without which they would be blocked from certain content. It is a start.

I just had to tick the box that I was over 18 on the newest update.

No ID shown or asked for.

(Latest iPhone & iPad update)

Yes this is the latest version which depends on how long you have held the account.

I m certainly not against it, I believe our young people need protecting and I think Keir Starmer is trying, I believe he is a genuine man, but I know teens and pre teens and young teens and they are as sneaky as hell, (weren’t we all? I remember climbing out a window to meet a boy I had been told I mustn’t see) and if there’s a way round it they ll find it.

The sites need a much higher proof of age identity and parents need education and to set rules …..’I look at your phone once a week, you don’t use it at meal times, and not after 8 pm or whatever time is applicable, or what ever they feel necessary to apply. Not just buying it giving it and that’s the end of it

Parents have to be more aware of their young, and what they are doing, like all these young people that have drowned in the good weather, in lakes and pits, do parents not realise they have to teach their children about danger….

Mamie

One of the recent Apple updates required proof of being 18 by passport, driving licence or credit card (not debit cards because you don't have to be 18) without which they would be blocked from certain content. It is a start.

I just had to tick the box that I was over 18 on the newest update.

No ID shown or asked for.

(Latest iPhone & iPad update)

I agree.

Idea is good, media companies need to sort. I know not how.

One of the recent Apple updates required proof of being 18 by passport, driving licence or credit card (not debit cards because you don't have to be 18) without which they would be blocked from certain content. It is a start.

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.