171
Florida advances law banning children under 16 from using social media (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Bill would prohibit teenagers from creating an account, and is now headed to the state’s Republican-controlled senate

Florida lawmakers advanced a bill on Wednesday that would prohibit social media platforms from allowing young teens to have an account while requiring everyone else to verify their age.

The measure prohibits anyone under 16 from creating a new social media account and requires platforms to delete existing accounts held by minors who are younger than 16. It also would require social media companies to delete any personal information from the accounts and for the platforms to use a “nongovernmental, independent, third-party not affiliated with the social media platform” to verify users’ age.

The bill passed the Florida house with a bipartisan 106-13 vote and now heads to the Republican-controlled senate.

all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dhork@lemmy.world 85 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It also would require social media .... platforms to use a “nongovernmental, independent, third-party not affiliated with the social media platform” to verify users’ age.

Quick, let's go check which State Legislators own shares in third-party age verification firms....

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago

I'd be shocked if there were such a firm without any official API from the states or feds to provide that verification

[-] qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one 41 points 9 months ago

It just sounds like they don't want kids to be able to talk to each other about how fucked their state and their educational system is becoming.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 30 points 9 months ago

That's exactly it, pre Internet it was easy for them to keep small town kids indoctrinated as a conservative because they could thoroughly control the flow of information

Post Internet it's simply not feasible without crazy ass laws like this, the second a kid gets online/on social media they see right through the conservative bullshit. It's not 100% ofc, but the majority yes and they're seeing it play out with gen z right now and that's what they're scared of

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

And what better way to promote information that you don't want shared then to ban it.

We were all teenagers once and we all know, once you ban something, it's like sharks tasting blood in the ocean, it's a signal to tell young people to go get it find it and use it just to piss off authority.

These laws won't prohibit young people ... it will encourage them to use social media.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

You'd think theyd have learned from the federal governments original Child Internet Protection law when every child suddenly turned "18+" lmao

[-] knobbysideup@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago

Ding Ding Ding!

[-] Uranium3006@kbin.social 4 points 9 months ago

100%.

[-] sygnius@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago

They're not wrong about the addiction to dopamine hits. However, this is such a big waste of time and money on such a poor way to handle this.

[-] Sheeple@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago

And ultimately it won't stop them and in fact put the kids in more danger because they'll actively be hiding their internet activity from people who could help them

[-] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

It also doesn't do anything to actually address those dopamine hits.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 33 points 9 months ago

It also would require social media companies to delete any personal information from the accounts and for the platforms to use a “nongovernmental, independent, third-party not affiliated with the social media platform” to verify users’ age.

How to get every Florida adult's identity stolen through a data leak.

[-] Uranium3006@kbin.social 26 points 9 months ago

this isn't to "protect children" and you should know better by now. it's a censorship bill because they want to keep kids ignorant and brainwashed. we should all oppose this

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago

I’m curious how they plan to enforce it?

VPN, create account. Boom. Yer in.

All they’re doing is teaching kids to go around adults, and evade “authorities”, etc.

[-] oxjox@lemmy.ml 23 points 9 months ago

It's so weird how the party of family values and limited government consistently aim to impose restrictions on parents.

I'm not opposed to kids being restricted from social media (I might go as far as fully supporting it), but that's the job of the parent, not Florida.

“These dopamine hits [from social media] are so addictive, it’s like a digital fentanyl,” Fiona McFarland, a Republican state lawmaker who cosponsored the legislation, said on the house floor on Wednesday, according to Politico. “And even the most plugged-in parent or attuned teen has a hard time shutting the door against these addictive features.”

You said it yourself... kids AND parents are both susceptible to the addiction. Are you going to ban social media for adults, legislators, grandmas? Trump lives in Florida. Please, can you ban him too??

[-] mrbubblesort@kbin.social 21 points 9 months ago

How they think this is gonna go: "Haha, now that we got all those youngins off the ticktoks they have to listen to us and believe what we tell them"

How it's really gonna go: "JUNIOR GET THE FUCK IN HERE! I need to see the new Trump meme from aunt Karen, why the hell does my facebook have 'blocked in the state of Florida' all over it? What'd you do to it?"

[-] theywilleatthestars@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago

Wonder how many queer kids will be deprived of the only community they have because of this

[-] Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website 12 points 9 months ago

The cruelty is the point.

[-] dezmd@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Lemmy active user increase.

This is certainly a startegem from power brokers trying to destroy the freedom and open communication the internet ushered in over the last 30 years. Its all about controlling the spread of information to limit exposure of corruption that protects and builds the long term shadow wealth.

Now Im sounding like a different side of the same coin of early 00s libertairan twat conspiracy fuckers.

[-] Cuttlefish1111@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

Party of small government

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 10 points 9 months ago

Hahahaha the internet has practically become like, 4 websites. Three of which are social media platforms. What the fuck are they supposed to do?

[-] nicetriangle@kbin.social 4 points 9 months ago

Ideally, touch grass.

Law's never gonna work tho. What are they gonna do? Start IDing social media users? I bet all the conspiracy theory wackjob MAGA Qanon types down there will just love that.

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago

Firearms not Facebook!

[-] dan1101@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago

If the kids can lie about their age they will just lie about their age.

[-] Froyn@kbin.social 5 points 9 months ago

So "plausible deniability for groomers" ?

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

Freedom!

[-] white_shotgun@aussie.zone 1 points 9 months ago

Bahahahahaha ahhh what a bunch of degenerate overreaching fuckheads

this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
171 points (98.9% liked)

News

23320 readers
3332 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
dezmd@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
Blackbeard@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world