this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2025
52 points (98.1% liked)

Canada

10761 readers
417 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As of Wednesday, all youth under 16 in Australia will be banned from major social media platforms like TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, Reddit, Twitch, and X. For over a decade, whistleblowers, politicians, academics, and experts around the world have sounded the alarm about the online harms people of all ages are exposed to.

...

The ban does nothing to prepare teens to respond to digital harms. It makes no investments in education, community training, or parental support. Youth will not be magically prepared to address problematic online behaviours or content when they turn 16.

The time and resources spent on the ban could be better spent on things like providing education and support for digital citizenship, media literacy, privacy rights or resource centres.

If social media is problematic for a 13, 14 or 15 year old, it’s still likely to be problematic for a 16, 25, or 80 year old. There is no body of research that establishes 16 as a “safe threshold” for social media use and the age for healthy use can vary across genders.

...

Under the current model, companies will not be inclined to improve their reporting systems for harmful content. In fact, in response to the ban, YouTube is actually removing a feature that would allow teens to report content they find inappropriate.

Youth under 16 who find ways to use these platforms, despite the bans, will be unlikely to come forward and ask for help if things go wrong. After all, they weren’t supposed to be online in the first place.

The answer to mitigating online harms is not kicking teens offline.

...

Social media companies also need to be accountable to the ways the platforms are designed and run. These platforms are designed in ways that push certain content and elicit particular engagements.

...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Parental controls have existed on home routes for years.

This leaves the ban of certain websites at your own discretion and allows you to raise your children the way you see fit.

Hell, parental controls can be tailored to only allow certain device on your home-network designated as "children's devices" to only access a list of certain websites blocking everything else. This would the easiest option to implement for any parent as they see fit.

Handing over personal info so easily to corporately owned websites for the sake of convenience in a huge privacy issue.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Most people don't think social media is an issue. But it's funny when the people who create this don't let their kids use it.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 days ago

If a parent is letting their kid on social media then they aren’t qualified to be a parent.

However the use of modem parental controls is much better than spying on people.