On Monday, Taylor Lorenz posted a telling story about how Meta has been suppressing access to LGBTQ content across its platforms, labeling it as “sensitive content” or “sexually explicit.” Posts wi…
I wonder why nobody is considering the most obvious solution to all this complication around what is NSFW and what is not: Children shouldn’t be on these platforms at all to begin with. They shouldn’t be anywhere near social media until age 14. Definitely not free roaming everywhere on the internet.
For us adults, I honestly cannot say whether moderation instigated by a company is better than moderation instigated by the users. The devil is in the details. This place isn’t moderated by a company and you’d probably think the moderation here is superior to Meta’s.
This is something parents should decide. They should know what kinds of content their kids will be exposed to, and decide when they’re ready. This isn’t something we should expect platforms or governments to decide.
Some parents will make terrible choices, but I think that’s less bad than what’s necessary to enforce either a ban or content moderation. I see nothing good coming from that longer term.
I used the internet extensively as a minor to socialize and find friends and to be exposed to viewpoints different from those of my peers. If I only had my peers to socialize with, things would have been much worse off for me. I found kind and supportive influences as a minor that kept me away from the hate/conservatism/fascism that many of my classmates descended into. I learned about the world and gained skills that made me a more well-rounded person. I even met up in person with thousands of strangers and had a grand time.
I see the gatekeeping of minors from internet spaces and worry about the impact that would have had on me and my development as a young person. If I hadn’t been welcomed as a minor online, I would not have been welcomed anywhere.
That said, I stayed the hell away from corporate spyware like facebook and twitter that only serve to reinforce existing problematic systems, expose people to the toxic IRL social environments that they may otherwise be trying to escape, and amplify the kind of hatred and bigotry that I personally was evading.
I miss the old internet where kids were safe. I don’t think that the solution is to ban kids; the solution is to ban platforms and profiteering incentive structures that create unsafe environments. The kids are the canaries in a coal mine. If the canary isn’t doing well, you don’t just ban it and keep digging: you get the hell out and find somewhere else to be.
I understand this sentiment because I had a similar story growing up, but I’ve had to come to terms that the internet of that era does not exist anymore.
Now we have these corporations who made it their goal to algorithmically trick you into spending more and more time engaged with their website for ad revenue, not caring how angry or misinformed people get in the meantime. It used to be a place we could escape to, but has turned into just another echo chamber/prison and worst of all - we’re addicted to it.
I think places like Mastodon and the Fediverse can help bridge this gap, but on the whole, the internet is just not a safe place for developing brains anymore.
I found kind and supportive influences as a minor that kept me away from the hate/conservatism/fascism that many of my classmates descended into.
Do you think your classmates found those influences from somewhere outside the internet? At least in Europe, the alt-right has been way more efficient at reaching young people online, especially boys and men.
The influences I had were furries (queers), science/scifi nerds, academics, service members of the military who were otherwise separated from community, etc. The internet brought us together.
It was that or rural Florida where if you went outside and got stabbed by one of those poison palm you’d just get told that those have to be there because they kept the slaves from escaping the circus in the good old days.
What you’re talking about with kids today is what I mean about them being canaries.
Actually verifying it and punishing the companies if they let underaged people use it. Alcohol stores are also punished when they sell products to children.
Ah, right. It’s possible yes that this would make it easier for them, but my understanding of technology is that it was pretty much possible like 10 years ago to track practically everyone who isn’t actively doing a countermeasures against it.
I personally think this would help, but there’s a lot folks online who scream “free speech” when you start talking about verifying age online. And honestly, I don’t know a good solution to balance it
I wonder why nobody is considering the most obvious solution to all this complication around what is NSFW and what is not: Children shouldn’t be on these platforms at all to begin with. They shouldn’t be anywhere near social media until age 14. Definitely not free roaming everywhere on the internet.
For us adults, I honestly cannot say whether moderation instigated by a company is better than moderation instigated by the users. The devil is in the details. This place isn’t moderated by a company and you’d probably think the moderation here is superior to Meta’s.
This is something parents should decide. They should know what kinds of content their kids will be exposed to, and decide when they’re ready. This isn’t something we should expect platforms or governments to decide.
Some parents will make terrible choices, but I think that’s less bad than what’s necessary to enforce either a ban or content moderation. I see nothing good coming from that longer term.
I disagree with this point.
I used the internet extensively as a minor to socialize and find friends and to be exposed to viewpoints different from those of my peers. If I only had my peers to socialize with, things would have been much worse off for me. I found kind and supportive influences as a minor that kept me away from the hate/conservatism/fascism that many of my classmates descended into. I learned about the world and gained skills that made me a more well-rounded person. I even met up in person with thousands of strangers and had a grand time.
I see the gatekeeping of minors from internet spaces and worry about the impact that would have had on me and my development as a young person. If I hadn’t been welcomed as a minor online, I would not have been welcomed anywhere.
That said, I stayed the hell away from corporate spyware like facebook and twitter that only serve to reinforce existing problematic systems, expose people to the toxic IRL social environments that they may otherwise be trying to escape, and amplify the kind of hatred and bigotry that I personally was evading.
I miss the old internet where kids were safe. I don’t think that the solution is to ban kids; the solution is to ban platforms and profiteering incentive structures that create unsafe environments. The kids are the canaries in a coal mine. If the canary isn’t doing well, you don’t just ban it and keep digging: you get the hell out and find somewhere else to be.
I understand this sentiment because I had a similar story growing up, but I’ve had to come to terms that the internet of that era does not exist anymore.
Now we have these corporations who made it their goal to algorithmically trick you into spending more and more time engaged with their website for ad revenue, not caring how angry or misinformed people get in the meantime. It used to be a place we could escape to, but has turned into just another echo chamber/prison and worst of all - we’re addicted to it.
I think places like Mastodon and the Fediverse can help bridge this gap, but on the whole, the internet is just not a safe place for developing brains anymore.
I agree with your final sentence applied to any corporate-owned website operating for profit, as long as you remove the word “developing”.
The solution isn’t to ban kids, it’s to ban the toxic sites, practices, and incentive structures.
I’m with you on this. My childhood church was christo-fascist, and it was my wide wanderings on the web that showed me a different way was possible.
Do you think your classmates found those influences from somewhere outside the internet? At least in Europe, the alt-right has been way more efficient at reaching young people online, especially boys and men.
I’m also talking about 15-20 years ago.
The influences I had were furries (queers), science/scifi nerds, academics, service members of the military who were otherwise separated from community, etc. The internet brought us together.
It was that or rural Florida where if you went outside and got stabbed by one of those poison palm you’d just get told that those have to be there because they kept the slaves from escaping the circus in the good old days.
What you’re talking about with kids today is what I mean about them being canaries.
Pretty much all social media has a minimum age of 13 in their ToS. So what exactly are you suggesting? Raising it by 1 year?
Actually verifying it and punishing the companies if they let underaged people use it. Alcohol stores are also punished when they sell products to children.
This is a terrible idea, and only makes it 10x easier for surveillance capitalism to track, profile, and propagandize the entire population.
This line of reasoning is basically using “won’t someone think of the children” fear mongering to hand over the keys to big brother.
I don’t see how that follows. Can you elaborate?
If you have to verify children’s identity, you have to verify everyone’s identity. This is part of KOSA. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/12/kids-online-safety-act-continues-threaten-our-rights-online-year-review-2024
Ah, right. It’s possible yes that this would make it easier for them, but my understanding of technology is that it was pretty much possible like 10 years ago to track practically everyone who isn’t actively doing a countermeasures against it.
I personally think this would help, but there’s a lot folks online who scream “free speech” when you start talking about verifying age online. And honestly, I don’t know a good solution to balance it
Raise it by 3. Under 16s shouldn’t have access to any social media.