← Feed
@ibboard@hachyderm.io
2026-09-18 13:59 UTC
@romli@social.vivaldi.net @ahltorp@mastodon.nu @markwyner@mas.to All of that is still parental responsibility in the world of social media!
If you wouldn't drive your kids into town and leave them to wander by themselves then don't leave them unsupervised on a phone or tablet.
If you wouldn't take them to an event and let them wander off and talk to strangers then you need parental controls on the account.
If you're worried about them picking up far-right bullshit or bigotry then help them manage the accounts they follow and explain why they've got to be careful about certain people and narratives.
There's age appropriate ways of dealing with all of this. And none of it requires invasive and unnecessary age checks for adults. It requires social media companies to add account controls that would benefit everyone, and it requires adults to take responsibility for their kids (even if they feel that tech is "scary" - because this isn't really a tech problem, it's a life skills problem)
Replies (1)
-
@ibboard@hachyderm.io @ahltorp@mastodon.nu @markwyner@mas.to That is akin to saying that in every scenario the child is entirely, and only, the parents responsibility and no-one else, least of all the government, should do anything to limit the freedom of children to do as they please.
Yes a parent should not let a young child wander off but if that did happen for some reason, they got lost say, most normal people would expect society to step in and prevent harm to the child. You would expect there would be limits on where, and for how long, people might allow that child to 'explore the world'.
Clearly that is not a minority viewpoint, and the EUKidsAct wouldnt have been proposed if there was not a lot of support for restricting social media for under 13s
Open ##5043272