Florida bill banning kids from social media

[Bradskii]

On the flip side, one simply has the ability to put down the phone or not log into facebook.

I'm not sure that's the point. If someone posts an unflattering picture of a kid combined with derogatory remarks then everyone else is seeing it, even if the kid chooses not to log on. And there's be enough people pointing that out.

If you do something shameful and nobody knows then you only have to deal with your own conscience. If everybody knows, then it's so much worse. If some kid makes fun of you because you're fat then it's that insult you have to deal with. If he posts it online then everyone joins in.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The difference is that there was very little real expertise behind the moral panics about video games or music. This isn't the case with concerns about social media impacting mental health.

To be fair, there's very little real expertise regarding the impact of social media at this point as well.

Soft sciences + Relatively New = Limited expertise


When did social media really become ubiquitous? Perhaps somewhere around 2012?

The first larger studies on the impacts on mental health didn't start until around 2015'ish I want to say?

The larger NIH meta analysis conducted in 2020 even concluded that there's nothing concrete.

7 of the 16 studies were cross-sectional and failed to determine the causal relationship between the variables of interest. Given the evidence from cross-sectional studies, it is not possible to conclude that the use of social networks causes mental health problems. Only three longitudinal studies examined the causal relationship between social media and mental health, which is hard to examine if the mental health problem appeared more pronounced in those who use social media more compared with those who use it less or do not use at all. Next, despite the fact that the proposed relationship between social media and mental health is complex, few studies investigated mediating factors that may contribute or exacerbate this relationship.

Social media is a new study that is rapidly growing and gaining popularity. Thus, there are many unexplored and unexpected constructive answers associated with it. However, the extent to which the use of social media impacts the public is yet to be determined.



Like with many other facets of the soft sciences, early research can sometimes be prone to biases, as the researchers who take up the mantle of wanting to studying it, are likely the ones who would have some strong opinions about it.


It's hard to isolate social media as a cause/culprit, when it's rise to prominence overlapped with a lot other big social/societal changes that were happening at the same time period. Some of which could absolutely lead to having more negative outlooks on life.

As I mentioned before, we (as a society) have done a terrible job of prepping this latest generation for reality. The tail-end of Millennials, and GenZ's were very coddled compared to their GenX & early-Millennial counterparts.

As a result, we've both
A) instilled some very unrealistic expectations in them, and
B) over-fixated on every societal problem (some real, some perceived) that they're not going to be be able to change/fix in any short period of time, and told them "you're the generation that will solve problem XYZ!"
...that all but guarantees disappointment when they get a little older

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

This absolutely is interstate commerce. The congress has the constitutional authority to regulate that.

By that logic, anything with a website falls under interstate commerce. In the old days, phones were tied to street addresses and regulated per state law.

We already know different areas regulate internet usage differently. California has privacy laws that are not applicable everywhere, website or not.

The Constitution preserves state authority to control what happens within state borders, especially state power to protect citizens and residents from what legislators or voters perceive as harms. This power to regulate “health, safety, and morals” is implicitly acknowledged by the Constitution, in the enumerated powers and by the Tenth Amendment.

 

[durangodawood]

By that logic, anything with a website falls under interstate commerce. In the old days, phones were tied to street addresses and regulated per state law.

Dont blame me. Blame the constitution. Its in there. I do appreciate that the founders lived in a world that moved at horse riding speed, and so most of life didnt need to cross state lines unless you lived near the border. But today states are far too small a unit for a lot of economic activity.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Dont blame me. Blame the constitution. Its in there. I do appreciate that the founders lived in a world that moved at horse riding speed, and so most of life didnt need to cross state lines unless you lived near the border. But today states are far too small a unit for a lot of economic activity.

The states still retain their Constitutional power. That is why all real estate claims, for example, have to be made in the jurisdiction of the real estate, even if you bought it online from Alaska. That is why we have different internet privacy laws for different states. For example:
Updated on May 10, 2023

The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) gives consumers more control over the personal information that businesses collect about them and the CCPA regulations provide guidance on how to implement the law. This landmark law secures new privacy rights for California consumers, including:

• The right to know about the personal information a business collects about them and how it is used and shared;
• The right to delete personal information collected from them (with some exceptions);
• The right to opt-out of the sale or sharing of their personal information; and
• The right to non-discrimination for exercising their CCPA rights.

This is the one of two laws where California makes sense - the other bars contractors from collecting more than a thousand up front (or 10%, whichever is less).

ALL data collecting should be opt-in, not opt-out by jumping through hoops. But it isn't.
My generally more rational state does not permit us to prevent data scraping like this.

 

[returntosender]

That should have been done by the parents.

 

[Brihaha]

Well, this bill passed the Florida senate and will now be sent to Governor Desantis's desk. The governor has expressed concerns about the bill infringing on privacy rights so it isn't clear what he will do. It seems several states have recently adopted laws to regulate children's access to social media beginning with Utah in March 2023. Followed by Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio and Texas.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/florida-lawmakers-pass-bill-ban-social-media-children-under-16-2024-02-23/

 

[TPop]

I learned Florida's House passed a measure that would ban children under 16 from joining social media platforms. There is research illustrating how social media is "an important driver" of our "national youth mental health crisis".

I have mixed feelings about this. I agree social media is fueling many problems in our society. And I do support efforts to protect our children. But this situation seems better suited for federal application on a national level. Maybe Florida will inspire our federal government to take up the issue. Either way any bill seems destined for litigation in court.

Presently I am leaning toward supporting these protective bills being created. We need to do all we can to protect our kids, especially if America isn't willing to implement any gun violence mitigation legislation. I feel like we can have a civil discussion on this topic. I am not confident we will, but that rarely stops me from trying. Anyone have thoughts on banning kids under 16 from social media? It seems like a fresh, relevant issue we could wear out like we do with the popular wedge issues .

Bill to ban minors from social media and terminate youths' accounts passes Florida House

A Florida bill that would ban social media for users under 16 passed the House Wednesday. Similar bills in other states have been snared in legal battles.

www.usatoday.com

We should not be advertising vices on TV and kids should not be allowed to access social media. It is the groomers, pedophiles, human traffickers that want your kids there. It is Satan.

Does anyone trust Google, facebook, X, Instagram, and all the other myriads of hidden unknown junk out there? Not I. These are the worst of peoples and companies. All they do is feed the 'I feel' generation. Yuck!

Peace and Blessings