Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 84 posts

Re: UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

#11

Post by ludston »

hopelite wrote: post #7

What is it about this 16 y/o cutoff that seems to be the focus everywhere? Why not 18? It almost seems like this will make SM attractive by making it a kind of forbidden fruit and/or a social standing status indicator for impressionable, malleable minded, underdeveloped minds of teens seeking to feel like adults. In other words, if I didn’t know any better, I would have guessed that it might actually be the likes of…

> What is it about this 16 y/o cutoff that seems to be the focus everywhere? Why not 18?

Some studies have found that puberty is the peak problematic age for people to be on social media and 16 is the rough point by which mostly this is finished. There is a book, "The Anxious Generation" that covers this pretty well.

Re: UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

#12

Post by [deleted] »

blitzar wrote: post #4
0x3f wrote: post #3

Porn block ineffective at capturing enough personal data. UK considers how it can build its own great firewall.

The UK has had a great firewall for decades - try going to a kiddie porn site or a torrent site and you will be unable to connect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_blocking_in_the_United_Kin...

[deleted]

Re: UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

#13

Post by 0x3f »

badgersnake wrote: post #8

Doing their level best to piss off the entire electorate with additional bureaucracy. Makes zero sense unless they’re actually trying to lose the next election. I opened Snapchat for 5 mins in Australia (on a trip there) and now it’s demanding I prove my age.

Sadly I don't think these are unpopular policies. At least not before they are implemented. The British public love a good ban.

Re: UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

#14

Post by ewwwtf »

blitzar wrote: post #4
0x3f wrote: post #3

Porn block ineffective at capturing enough personal data. UK considers how it can build its own great firewall.

The UK has had a great firewall for decades - try going to a kiddie porn site or a torrent site and you will be unable to connect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_blocking_in_the_United_Kin...

[flagged]

Re: UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

#16

Post by wongarsu »

hopelite wrote: post #7

What is it about this 16 y/o cutoff that seems to be the focus everywhere? Why not 18? It almost seems like this will make SM attractive by making it a kind of forbidden fruit and/or a social standing status indicator for impressionable, malleable minded, underdeveloped minds of teens seeking to feel like adults. In other words, if I didn’t know any better, I would have guessed that it might actually be the likes of…

Why 18? Why not 21, or 26?

I agree with you that this would create a forbidden fruit, and a combination of social media becoming more desirable to under-16yo and teenagers binging social media as soon as they become 16. But the solution to that is to push the age limit down, not up. 14 or 12 would be much more reasonable ages. That gives parents a clear cutoff when their kids have to be ready for social media, and prevents bans in the phase where teens are most rebellious

Re: UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

#17

Post by closewith »

hopelite wrote: post #7

What is it about this 16 y/o cutoff that seems to be the focus everywhere? Why not 18? It almost seems like this will make SM attractive by making it a kind of forbidden fruit and/or a social standing status indicator for impressionable, malleable minded, underdeveloped minds of teens seeking to feel like adults. In other words, if I didn’t know any better, I would have guessed that it might actually be the likes of…

In the UK, 16 is the age of consent for medical treatments, driving licenses, joining the armed forces, etc, so it's generally the age when a child can lawfully make many of their own decisions.

Re: UK consulting on bringing in social media ban for under 16s

#19

Post by Closi »

hopelite wrote: post #7

What is it about this 16 y/o cutoff that seems to be the focus everywhere? Why not 18? It almost seems like this will make SM attractive by making it a kind of forbidden fruit and/or a social standing status indicator for impressionable, malleable minded, underdeveloped minds of teens seeking to feel like adults. In other words, if I didn’t know any better, I would have guessed that it might actually be the likes of…

This was an argument that was used to not ban smoking for kids in the UK back in the day. From the parliment debate...

> [banning smoking would] afford a direct encouragement to children to smoke. Most boys of a tender age who might be seen smoking in public places did so, not because of any attachment to tobacco, but because they considered it a practice in advance of their years, and something moreover which their elders told them not to do, affording them, therefore, the added pleasure of disobedience which was so dear to boys of their age.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1908-10-13/debates/6aa...

Perhaps it does make it cooler - but undoubtedly the restrictions reduced availability and reduced the number of children being addicted.

As for the actual age cut-off, it's always going to be fairly arbitrary, or a 'balanced judgement'.

Post reply on HN