WHAT DOES A SOCIAL MEDIA BAN FOR UNDER-16s REALLY MEAN?

Starmer has announced a proposal for a social media ban for under-16s. 

Of course, at first glance, that sounds good.

We all know how social media can be negative for children.

However, we know the real agenda is to use our concern for children's safety to create a backdoor for adults to accept digital ID.

i.e. If children are going to need to prove their identity to get on social media so will adults.

It is easy to imagine how this will creep forward.

Today, it's about access to social media.

Tomorrow it will stepped up to protecting children from harmful content on the Internet as a whole.

Before we know it, all access to the internet and to the information we need will be restricted. 

We will be required to enter a digital ID to prove that we're old enough to understand the results of our online searches before we tap one word of enquiry.

And of course, every search, thought or comment will be recorded and stored in the vast data centres they are building.

Besides, anyone with kids of this age knows they will find a way around such a ban.

Kids want to talk to their friends and privately, which is why Snapchat, with its vanishing pictures, has become the number one teen app.

If banned, the use of VPNs to circumnavigate the ban will be just their first step, opening them back up into the world of porn and more.

If we want to protect kids from social media, there have to be cleverer ways.

There are apps parents can get to govern their children’s phones. Certain platforms can be banned or time-restricted. Phones can be deactivated at certain times. This shifts control from the government back to parents. Yes, not perfect but an alternative and if clever minds are put to this challenge, can be protected without entrapping the rest of the adult population.

What can we do?

In my last few talks, I've tried to hone in on the desperate need of people to put their heads above the parapet.

Yes…  The paradox… our actions are recorded, but to stop our actions from being further restricted and recorded, we need to be seen to be against the very surveillance.

Our modern-day power lies in expressing our sentiments through online activity.

I personally believe this is stronger than voting.

The politicians, the government and the powers that be, watch online activity like hawks and respond accordingly. 

The easiest recent example is when Netanyahu appeared on television making a public announcement, apologising for the vandalism of the statue of Christ.

Why did he not do the same for the thousands of children ‘vandalised’ in Gaza so badly that they died?

The answer is simple.

The vandalism of the statute caused such online outrage that someone obviously gave Bibi a whisper in the ear, " You’d better say something, we can see you're turning the Christians of America against Israel on this one."

Clearly, Christian’s under media influence have not been posting about the ‘vandalised’ children to the same scale as the vandalised statue.

The result?

Bombs still land on children, yet Bibi said "Ooops, sorry" and the IDF troops were given strict commands not to film themselves desecrating Christian symbols, or blowing up churches.

Back to the social media ban on under-16s

The Gov will have conducted their premarketing surveys before announcing this ban.

They have presumed from their small samples that it will work... hence the announcement.

But the people in these surveys couldn't see the trap.

No one had pointed it out to them.

If we want the social media ban on kids to be pulled back into a form that isn’t such a trap for adults, everyone needs to raise their voice and prove their marketing surveys wrong.

Share articles and posts that are against the ban.

Share alternative ideas to protect children from harmful content on platforms.

Click the relevant emojis expressing approval, disapproval, or mockery under such social media posts. 

This is the modern, effective form of voting that will be measured and enacted upon.

I post this image under every newsletter, but putting it here again as a reminder of the game at play.