Kemi Badenoch doesn’t really need to speak in public more than once a month and she’ll do ok. In that respect, keeping her head down is proving very effective.

Sniping from the sidelines and criticising everyone clearly has merit. 🙃

24 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

Quite a few children's charities seem to bd opposed to it

Why is that? I must admit I have only seen the odd comment from the usual free speech lot trying to say it isn't a good idea.

It probably won't work anywhere near as well as it needs to but to do nothing isn't an option imo.

Just now, Winchester White said:

Why is that? I must admit I have only seen the odd comment from the usual free speech lot trying to say it isn't a good idea.

It probably won't work anywhere near as well as it needs to but to do nothing isn't an option imo.

That online communities and support are often a lifesaver for children, especially children from poorer backgrounds or who haven't found a supportive friendship group at school/are experiencing bullying, etc.

And also that it might push children into less regulated spaces

Their preference seems to be for making the platforms safer rather than an outright ban

24 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

That online communities and support are often a lifesaver for children, especially children from poorer backgrounds or who haven't found a supportive friendship group at school/are experiencing bullying, etc.

And also that it might push children into less regulated spaces

Their preference seems to be for making the platforms safer rather than an outright ban

Social media isn't safe..

They can still contact charities, they just can't chat on open forums and have to instigate conversations.

Places like this are not social media, nor reddit.. because if somebody says something they'll get called out on it.

24 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

That online communities and support are often a lifesaver for children, especially children from poorer backgrounds or who haven't found a supportive friendship group at school/are experiencing bullying, etc.

And also that it might push children into less regulated spaces

Their preference seems to be for making the platforms safer rather than an outright ban

I have read that. I have not read how the charities think you will make them safe.

The Social Media companies have not done enough.

it sounds like a good idea

but i would say anyone

under 13

kids now are not like us in the 70s 80s

10 hours ago, only1swanny said:

Possibly not, but if they do set up Face verification, they'll have to get you to sign back in, means you have some control over content at least and can see if they have people trying to get them to message privately, that's some of the battle in itself.

Can't account for parents that are not willing to follow rules and there's only so much the Government can do to try and keep kids safe.

You can't message anyone on YouTube.

It's just videos.

Social media is safe for 99% of kids that use it.

Banning it won't stop online bullying as they'll all still have group chats available.

If X and Tiktok sorted their shit out none of this would be needed.

10 hours ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

That online communities and support are often a lifesaver for children, especially children from poorer backgrounds or who haven't found a supportive friendship group at school/are experiencing bullying, etc.

And also that it might push children into less regulated spaces

Their preference seems to be for making the platforms safer rather than an outright ban

Exactly where I'm at with it.

My mates kid, as sad as it seems, is a bit of a recluse. He loves gaming and has got loads of friends on a whole network of stuff.

He's got issues that he struggles in the outside world making friends and stuff.

He's not sat watching gore videos or self harm tutorials. He's playing games and sharing comic book vids with a network of like minded kids across the world.

Taking all that away from him will do more harm than good.

What's he gonna do, all of a sudden go out and start playing footy in the street?

It's all 10 years too late.

They've got to be seen to be doing something.
The problem is that pretty much all politicians (irrespective of colour of rosette) are quite out of touch with real life and very out of touch with the nuances of being 11-16 years old.

Whatever any party does to attempt to tackle the issue won't be enough, won't be the best/correct way of dealing with it etc etc.

The "policing" needs to start with the providers, sort your house out or it's a blanket ban like the draconian measures in China.
We don't want to get to that point, but something drastic might just have to happen, if the big firms can't/won't sort it.

18 hours ago, Ani said:

BBC News

Russia was behind arson attacks targeting PM, BBC reveals

Evidence shows Russians directing the plot and stoking tensions with fake far-right and Muslim groups.

More bias reporting from the BBC I assume ?

Farage and Tommy are so up the Russians they have no idea how stupid they sound claiming to be Patriots whilst a foreign Government tries to destabilise the country and beyond.

Facts are facts (although I do tend to take the Dead Sea with BBC News as they have serious form).

Fuck all to do with anything else. Russians financed it if the BBC investigation is correct. That's it.

Attempts to link Farage to Russia are simply a rinse and repeat of what was attempted with Trump. A leftie scare tactic ignored by anyone with even half a brain.

17 hours ago, Sweep said:

I think they know it won't work massively well, but they have to be seen to be doing something, as "big tech" don't give a fuck what kids do or don't see on line.

Easier said than done, but it's really down to parents to try and police their kids screen time -my mate has 2, and they only have 1 hour screen time per day (much to their distress), I think he's got some sort of setting where their tablets automatically lock, and only he can override it, via some app he has on his phone

Mr. Beige is simply trying to project power and control with both this and the Russian tanker. In this particular week. I wonder why?

Dead Man Walking.

3 hours ago, gonzo said:

Exactly where I'm at with it.

My mates kid, as sad as it seems, is a bit of a recluse. He loves gaming and has got loads of friends on a whole network of stuff.

He's got issues that he struggles in the outside world making friends and stuff.

He's not sat watching gore videos or self harm tutorials. He's playing games and sharing comic book vids with a network of like minded kids across the world.

Taking all that away from him will do more harm than good.

What's he gonna do, all of a sudden go out and start playing footy in the street?

It's all 10 years too late.

You are right it is late, but something needs to be done. My missus has amongst her friends 3 who have sons (very high % of people affected seem to be male) who suffer from some type of social anxiety , never go out and spend their time on computers.

No idea how old your mates lad is but her mates kids are late teens/early 20s. No idea what they are going to do for the rest of their lives as they are so reclusive can not see them getting a job. In the example of your mate, what happens next ?

we talk a fair bit on here about mental health and you will never convince me otherwise that Social Media is the major thing feeding the crisis we have talked about on here. 25% of suicides in young people are linked to Social media and suicide rate amongst kids has increased by 50% in last decade those facts alone justifies the ban. 75% of suicides are male backing up the point I made earlier.

We need to break that cycle, the social media companies have been asked to step up and have simply ignored the request. Alongside this ban we need to be looking at how we support young people with the challenges of growing up in a world that is so different than the one we did. That includes working with the various charities and support groups to see how we support and develop channels for those that need support to get it.

I am not expecting to see mass games of football in the local park or on our street , but getting kids off social media that is doing significant harm to significant numbers is something I 100% support.

3 hours ago, gonzo said:

You can't message anyone on YouTube.

It's just videos.

Social media is safe for 99% of kids that use it.

Banning it won't stop online bullying as they'll all still have group chats available.

If X and Tiktok sorted their shit out none of this would be needed.

Teacher on the wireless earlier described the reels on you tube as the sugar of addiction, rather than harmful content it just drags people into hours of video content.

Sure a fair few on here will have been dragged into the worm hole on there. I must have watched videoes of our goals at Wembley taken on phones from every single section of the ground.

when I was 15 I wasn't allowed to smoke or drink

but I did

we found a way

the kids will find a way if the tech allows it

it's out of the hands of the government, saying it's banned is one thing, making sure it's banned is another

my experience of social media these days suggests over 16s are more of a problem anyway

Chatting to my grandson about this last night he doesn't seem bothered that it will stop him getting/keeping accounts , he was on about using different browsers and switching off some settings to get around it. He is nearly 15.

I agree with the fundamental idea of protecting kids and introducing some controls.

Not sure a complete ban is the way, and maybe something more nuanced is needed.

Really difficult to know which way to go- some affected parents feel banning it is wrong and won't work, whilst others want it.

Not really a win-win option available.

3 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Facts are facts (although I do tend to take the Dead Sea with BBC News as they have serious form).

Fuck all to do with anything else. Russians financed it if the BBC investigation is correct. That's it.

Attempts to link Farage to Russia are simply a rinse and repeat of what was attempted with Trump. A leftie scare tactic ignored by anyone with even half a brain.

Looks like case of "Fuhrerprinzip"... in Nazi Germany politicians and leaders all carried out "what Hitler wants" without actually seeking direct orders, they supposed exterminating Jews would be what he wanted so they got on with it thereby climbing their career ladders, to date no historian has ever uncovered such directives from the Fuhrer.

A totalitarian regime such as Russia will operate on "what Putin wants"... in this case I would imagine the enablers will end up disappearing into the Lubyanka after embarrassing Mr Putin

I keep hearing that a ban won’t totally solve the problem and lots of kids will find their way round it.

What I am not hearing is any serious ideas of what the Govt can or should be doing now.

Teenager suicide rate up by 50% in last decade. 200 teenagers a year killing themselves every year. Will a ban stop this totally ? No. Might it help reduce the increase ? Who knows but it has to be worth a go, surely all the people protesting to protect our kids will be supporting this.

4 minutes ago, Ani said:

I keep hearing that a ban won’t totally solve the problem and lots of kids will find their way round it.

What I am not hearing is any serious ideas of what the Govt can or should be doing now.

Teenager suicide rate up by 50% in last decade. 200 teenagers a year killing themselves every year. Will a ban stop this totally ? No. Might it help reduce the increase ? Who knows but it has to be worth a go, surely all the people protesting to protect our kids will be supporting this.

Is that true ? That's mental if so

41 minutes ago, deeane Koontz said:

Is that true ? That's mental if so

Historical Rise: Over the last decade, suicide rates among children and young adults (ages 15-25) in England have risen by around 50%, reaching their highest recorded levels in over 30 years.

Sadly it is

2 hours ago, Ani said:

Teacher on the wireless earlier described the reels on you tube as the sugar of addiction, rather than harmful content it just drags people into hours of video content.

Sure a fair few on here will have been dragged into the worm hole on there. I must have watched videoes of our goals at Wembley taken on phones from every single section of the ground.

Not having kids I don't feel wholly enabled to make many comments except if the level of addiction is so great (and from what I see it is), there will need to be a lot of support available should the social media "fix" be suddenly turned off... some sort of a detox programme will be needed

2 hours ago, Dimron said:

Not having kids I don't feel wholly enabled to make many comments except if the level of addiction is so great (and from what I see it is), there will need to be a lot of support available should the social media "fix" be suddenly turned off... some sort of a detox programme will be needed

You are probably right, to expect kids to suddenly go out and discover nature, play Kerby, start reading books, enjoy cycling adventures with their mates is bollocks, something needs to be introduced to fill the gap and support those who are addicted and/or reliant on it.

But if we keep just kicking the can down the road nothing will happen and there is no reason to think the suicide rate will do anything but continue to rise.

15 minutes ago, Ani said:

Historical Rise: Over the last decade, suicide rates among children and young adults (ages 15-25) in England have risen by around 50%, reaching their highest recorded levels in over 30 years.

Sadly it is

I'd be interesting to know the breakdown by age in that age bracket

5 hours ago, Zico said:

my experience of social media these days suggests over 16s are more of a problem anyway

I did think a ban for the over 60s might be more appropriate

11 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

I'd be interesting to know the breakdown by age in that age bracket

Tbh I started looking at the data. And it got depressing , the good news is the actual number of about 200 a year is relatively low. There is some discrepancy in numbers based on coroners recording of cause of death.

16 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

I did think a ban for the over 60s might be more appropriate

🎣

Neil Thompson would have been 65 this year. Sir Tim Berners-Lee is 71 ( a good age) both responsible in their own way of allowing stupid people to say stupid things to a much wider audience than they deserve.