Australia's landmark social media ban for children is being challenged in the nation's highest court, with two teenagers alleging the law is unconstitutional as it robs them of their right to free communication.
And the response?
After news of the case broke, Communications Minister Anika Wells told parliament the government would not be swayed. "We will not be intimidated by threats. We will not be intimidated by legal challenges. We will not be intimidated by big tech. On behalf of Australian parents, we will stand firm," she said.
Why can't they, then, and if they feel giving their children access is a risk, not allow them to access it? Why do they need the hand of government to act for them? What the hell happened to Australia to make them such cravens who freak out at children's TV stars appearing in 'unsavory' music videos?
Is it because every visit to the loo or game of football in the back garden runs the risk of death by lethal wildlife?
Noah Jones argued the government's policy was "lazy". "We are the true digital natives and we want to remain educated, robust, and savvy in our digital world... They should protect kids with safeguards, not silence."
Sounds like the kids are alright to me...
Though opposed by the tech companies who will be charged with enforcing it, the ban is supported by most Australian adults, according to polls. However, some mental health advocates say it may cut kids off from connection, and others say it could push youngsters to even-less-regulated corners of the internet.
We'll see...
No comments:
Post a Comment