• bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Why not if you’re a parent who thinks smartphones are bad, don’t give one to your kid? No reason for a law here.

      • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Seriously. Why even have a government unless they are telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies, and parents what they can and cannot do, share with, or read to their children?

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      There’s an all or nothing problem here.

      It’s actually a good way to ostracize your child by making them be the only one without a phone.

      • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        But that’s also legislating how everyone should raise their kids based on how you want to raise yours.

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Only if the law passes, which in theory means it has majority support. All laws legislate against the minority opinion.

          • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            True, but that all exists on a spectrum, and a law which prohibits all children from using a device because you don’t want your kid using that device and they’ll get bullied if they’re the only one, seems a little excessive. Might as well ban expensive sneakers or shiny pokemon cards too.

            The root of the issue is parents controlling how much their child uses a device, and you just cannot legislate that away. Even if it was 100% illegal, you think parents wouldn’t let kids use the devices in their home if it made things easier? “Just ban it” never works, you need to incentivize alternate behavior.

          • angrystego@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Laws can allow exceptions and protect minorities. Laws are not always black and white, just like most of reality.

    • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think the government should be going after service providers and advertiser’s that knowing and deliberately target children with content that isn’t curated by a suitable authority for the children’s age group.

      Previously we had librarians and TV channels to regulate children’s media. Responsible people making reasonable judgements about the content a child should be targeted with.

      That isn’t the case anymore. Social media allows people and organisations direct access to children with no accountable authority in-between. Children are watching content that the child knows they shouldn’t be watching. The producer and the service provider also knows this too. So children will place concert effort to avoid it being detected.

      They all know that they are making content for children. Even when they’re making content that the know isn’t suitable for them. The people behind prime energy drink wanted to sell alcoholic drinks. They revealed in a podcast they didn’t because they knew there was no market for it as their audience was far too young. Despite this they continue to make content that uses frequently sexual and violent humour. They also use and play with racism and sexism in their content.

      Regulate the market and the problem will dwindle away. Their is entire businesses set up to pray on the attention of children.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Exactly. Some parts of my country are banning social media for kids without parental approval, which means they need to verify that I am an adult and my kid is not. That’s a privacy violation imo, and I will use a VPN to get around it if needed.

      I’m capable of monitoring what my kid has access to, and I’m capable of building trust with them so they don’t feel the need to go behind my back. Laws like this don’t allow for trust since the government is the one making the decisions, not the kids.

      I’m not giving my kids a smartphone (except maybe a loaner phone here and there) until they prove to be they can be responsible, or they actually need one. I have a 10yo, and he’s definitely not getting one yet.

    • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The majority of people don’t understand the harms of social media even while living through them. That said social media is the majority of the problem, so just give us the ability to lock it down for our kids and that would work for me. Plenty of other good uses for smartphones.