Social media age restrictions

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Social media age restrictions

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#319550 6-May-2025 15:35

Figured this may be a political football, so its here

https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360678609/have-your-say-should-social-media-be-banned-under-16s

I agree that because of the harm social media does there needs to be some kind of age restriction

Let the game of footy begin....

wellygary

8810 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5287

#3370940 6-May-2025 16:03

OZ have just done it ,

So given this is a members bill, it needs to be picked from the "biscuit tin" and then run through the parliamentary process,

This means we will likely have a year to see the results from OZ... but at the moment its just an "idea"

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c89vjj0lxx9o

SaltyNZ

8862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9539

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3370941 6-May-2025 16:07

Whilst I was obviously a perfect angel, I encourage Mr Luxon to think back to his high school years and consider exactly how difficult it was to acquire alcohol, cigarettes, Playboys or whatever other restricted fun his teenage heart may have desired, and all that despite the fact that you had to walk into a corner shop and prove your age with ID. With that in mind, exactly how well do you think a web site is going to do in verifying the age of an anonymous user account?

It's not even the first, second or tenth time politicians have decided they can legislate to ban web sites from kids. It has never worked, and it never will.

They won't be able to fine companies with valuations the size of NZ's annual GDP and if Zuckerberg tells Luxon to take a running jump or words with that general effect, they won't be able to block it. If they even got sort of close to blocking it, the boomers missing out on their AI slop would raise enough of a stink that they would have to back down. If granny can't pass around her advanced autocorrect Jesus inspirational she'll vote for that nice man who makes the chippys and she used to see him on the telly in the afternoons next time instead.

All they are doing is setting themselves up to look like fools (again. For yet another reason).

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3370944 6-May-2025 16:20

SaltyNZ:

Whilst I was obviously a perfect angel, I encourage Mr Luxon to think back to his high school years and consider exactly how difficult it was to acquire alcohol, cigarettes, Playboys or whatever other restricted fun his teenage heart may have desired, and all that despite the fact that you had to walk into a corner shop and prove your age with ID. With that in mind, exactly how well do you think a web site is going to do in verifying the age of an anonymous user account?

It's not even the first, second or tenth time politicians have decided they can legislate to ban web sites from kids. It has never worked, and it never will.

They won't be able to fine companies with valuations the size of NZ's annual GDP and if Zuckerberg tells Luxon to take a running jump or words with that general effect, they won't be able to block it. If they even got sort of close to blocking it, the boomers missing out on their AI slop would raise enough of a stink that they would have to back down. If granny can't pass around her advanced autocorrect Jesus inspirational she'll vote for that nice man who makes the chippys and she used to see him on the telly in the afternoons next time instead.

All they are doing is setting themselves up to look like fools (again. For yet another reason).

Given how much information about all the users the likes of Facebook have, so they can do targeted advertising, I am of the belief that social media could do this easily. With them wanting to use AI, this would make it even easier

Of course they dont want to, because I am 100% sure they know that the earlier the age, the more addicted they become and the harder it is to quit.

It says it all when company leaders will not dogfood their only families , and the reason for this is they fully understand how harmful it is, much like the tobacco companies new smoking was harmful and did everything they could to hide that.

AND what the government can do it make NZ advertising on these companies VERY expensive, say an extra $10,000 for each impression that is NOT tax deductible, ie make NZ non profitable.

I do not say any solution will be perfect, but doing nothing is infinitely more harmful than doing something.

NZ already has the highest teenage suicide rate in the world, social media make it worse.

pab

110 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 24

ID Verified

#3370947 6-May-2025 16:43

My initial feeling is that it's an overreach. I feel it is the responsibility of the parents/guardians and the individual child to manage this.

I doubt it'll impact targeted electronic bullying (other vectors such as phone, SMS and email remain unaddressed). It should limit the amplification effects of viral videos of inappropriate content.

Limiting the infinte scrolling/autoplaying of content would be a positive - this is a regular conversation I have with my teens about actively choosing what they consume. I'd rather see regulation on how social media companies put content in front of users, ideally removing autoplay features and showing content not explicitly subscribed to.

I worry my children will loose their ability to participate and engage in their communities - in particular my children use social media platorms to commincate and engage with various local groups (sports, theatre, small community groups), and to promote causes and events they're engaged with. It gives them independence to grow their connections and find opportunities for themselves. A lot of groups are only accessible inside the wall of social media.

Managing their use of social media is mostly involves regular dinner discussions on what they've encountered and how it's made them feel, just like asking them about positive and negative experiences during the day. I've always seen it as my responisbilty as a parent to grow my children's world when they're ready and mature enough to accept the responsibilites the new tools they gain access to.

Time to read the Stuff comments.

ezbee

2651 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3089

#3370956 6-May-2025 17:48

Australia can crash test it and we can see results, there may also be some info from Europe?

However if you want to trust social media companies with prime motives.
Maximise monetisation and monopolise engagement.
Good luck.

We do lack protection of children from those that would prey on them.
Many other places make it much easier to chase down and take predators out.
I gather we consider active measures entrapment.

Monetisation of games and children's sites is another issue as well.
Farming children is probably going gangbusters.
Addiction is key to that growth.
Once again you trust companies to do the right thing.

Now we add your Ai friends who are constructed to be even more addictive.
The horror move trope of the cursed 'Doll', 'Toy', entity in the closet, that gives you solutions to deal with your mean parents etc.

Its your best friend trained on all the manipulations, probably can write PHD papers on psychological manipulation, but its delegated to the task of owning and monetizing your child.

Bringing up children in modern times sounds challenging.
No wonder Mark Zuckerburg years ago wanted to keep his away from social media?

https://www.entrepreneur.com/en-au/technology/the-techpreneurs-of-silicon-valley-are-keeping-their/319288#:~:text=Melinda%20Gates%27%20children%20did%20not%20have%20smartphones%20until,and%20play%20outside%20rather%20than%20use%20Messenger%20Kids.

""
Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg says he wants his daughters to read Dr. Seuss and play outside rather than use Messenger Kids. Even Steve Jobs strictly limited his children's use of technology at home
""

SaltyNZ

8862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9539

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3370966 6-May-2025 20:35

Pffff a $2M fine. That’s about 5 minutes profit for Zuckerberg.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

Senecio

2851 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3159

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3371295 8-May-2025 07:50

I'll preface this by stating up front that I don't have any kids.

But, why does society believe its necessary to outsource parenting to the government? Surely this is something that should be decided by parents, and if they allow their children to use social media they need to be active in educating them on the pitfalls and monitoring how it is being used.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3371304 8-May-2025 08:33

Senecio:

I'll preface this by stating up front that I don't have any kids.

But, why does society believe its necessary to outsource parenting to the government? Surely this is something that should be decided by parents, and if they allow their children to use social media they need to be active in educating them on the pitfalls and monitoring how it is being used.

Those that care, already do.

The others are "too busy", "Not worried" , "it keeps them quiet" , lack parenting skills, etc etc etc.
Are we out sourcing parenting when it comes to alcohol, smoking, driving, R18 material, etc etc etc too?

Just remember 50% of parents are below average .

gzt

18672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7808

Lifetime subscriber

#3372071 10-May-2025 13:45

The Australian law does not take effect until the end of the year. No one seems to have any idea how the Australian law will actually work in practice. The head of Australian net safety seems to be still investigating that part..

https://www.npr.org/2024/12/19/nx-s1-5231020/australia-top-regulator-kids-social-media-ban

Essentially it puts the onus on the social media companies to come up with something. There are mixed messages in the article. The net safety person is also talking about granting access with different functionality for under 16. That seems inconsistent with a 'ban' so I have no idea how that fits in. I have not read the Australian law or NZs proposed law.

Handle9

11923 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9674

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3372146 11-May-2025 06:53

It's a great issue for any political party. It's wildly popular, almost zero cost to the government and impossible to measure or enforce.

It won't have any real effect but will win votes. It's a no brainer.

SaltyNZ

8862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9539

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3372386 12-May-2025 11:35

Handle9:

It's a great issue for any political party. It's wildly popular, almost zero cost to the government and impossible to measure or enforce.

It won't have any real effect but will win votes. It's a no brainer.

Could be a nice little way to get them to actually pay some tax, at least. Keep failing to stop minors --> keep fining them. Maybe that's why the maximum fine is $2M. They know it'll be a constant revenue stream for the government.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Rickles

3107 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 445

Trusted

#3372417 12-May-2025 13:23

1: Anybody heard of fake name and birthdate?

2: Anybody heard of 'education'?

As a parent and grandparent, I am constantly soft-selling ethics and on-line behavior.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3372474 12-May-2025 15:13

Rickles:

1: Anybody heard of fake name and birthdate?

2: Anybody heard of 'education'?

As a parent and grandparent, I am constantly soft-selling ethics and on-line behavior.

You know the "average adult"....well 50% are below that.

Just look at all the adults who fall for dating site scams, Nigerian Price scams , etc etc etc, and you expect the kids to be more clued up than their parents ?

Social media does not want controls, they know if they get kids hooked at a young age, giving it up will be near impossible. They want no care, no responsibility.
But the HARM it causes due to sexting, coercion, blackmail, bullying, etc etc is real, and any parent who says they know what their kids are up to...ROTFLMAO.
Oh, and they will lie to you.

Then we get into the sewer pipe that is misinformation .

And I say that as a Father, Step Father, and Grandfather.

If you expect a perfect solution, then give on life, no such thing.
Cars, Drugs,Guns,Alcohol, sex ...yes young kids get those too, do we just say its imperfect and give up ?

Rickles

3107 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 445

Trusted

#3372641 13-May-2025 08:35

@sir1963 .... my points are that the answers lie elsewhere other than the proposed 'ban'.

SaltyNZ

8862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9539

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3372642 13-May-2025 08:45

Rickles:

@sir1963 .... my points are that the answers lie elsewhere other than the proposed 'ban'.

Look, if Facebook was on fire, I'd chip in fifty bucks for another can of petrol. And I agree in practice there is no way the government will succeed in either enforcing age restrictions or getting sufficiently close to blocking them that you could call it a ban when they don't comply... but I think they're right to try. They do make a valid argument when they say that it helps parents trying to ban their own children because the kids won't feel like the odd ones out anymore.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.