Ban beneath 14s from social media, Mirror readers say – ballot outcomes

The governor of Florida has signed a invoice prohibiting youngsters beneath the age of 14 from accessing social media, so we requested Mirror readers what they considered the information.

Once the HB3 legislation takes impact, these aged 14 and 15 should get hold of consent from a mother or father earlier than becoming a member of an internet platform, comparable to Instagram or Facebook. Governor Ron DeSantis signed the invoice final week, as he mentioned: “Social media harms children in a variety of ways,” and the measure “gives parents a greater ability to protect their children.”

Under the laws, social media corporations can be compelled to take away present accounts for many who are beneath 14, or face being sued on behalf of the kid who has made the account. According to stories, a minor may very well be handed as much as $10,000 (£7,908) in damages, whereas corporations is also fined as much as $50,000 (£39,538) per violation of the legislation.

Republican speaker Paul Renner mentioned: “A child in their brain development doesn’t have the ability to know that they’re being sucked into these addictive technologies.” The invoice has warned that social media promotes dangerous materials to minors which is “lacking serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value”, and comprises “patently offensive” sexual messages and indecency.

It is predicted to come back into drive in January 2025, however will cope with challenges by corporations who declare the invoice violates the US structure. The mom of murdered teen Brianna Ghey has additionally referred to as for kids beneath 16 to be banned from social media and have smartphones with no entry to networking apps.

Esther needs youngsters to be given telephones which can be “suitable” for them and linked to their dad and mom’ telephone to flag suspicious exercise. Her plea comes after it was revealed one among 16-year-old Brianna’s killers, Scarlett Jenkinson, additionally 16, was fixated with the darkish net, which she accessed on her telephone, and claimed to have considered dwell homicide and torture streams.

Research by the Priory Group has proven that 92 p.c of UK dad and mom suppose that social media and the web is having a detrimental impression on the psychological well being of younger individuals. The foremost causes highlighted within the findings had been cyber-bullying (50%), decreasing vanity (41%), nervousness over getting sufficient likes/followers (40%), lack of face-to-face interplay (47%), lack of high quality sleep (43%), and its encouragement of early sexualisation (39%).

We requested Mirror readers in the event that they suppose beneath 14s needs to be banned from social media and a whopping 96 p.c mentioned ‘Yes’. Around 995 individuals took half in our ballot, and a staggering 955 mentioned that minors needs to be prohibited from the web platforms. Voicing their ideas within the feedback part, one reader penned: “Finally, maybe common sense will prevail. Even the Americans are seeing social media as an unhealthy if not dangerous place.”

Another shared: “Probably anyone under 14 (and many over that age too) do not have the emotional capacity or awareness of danger to cope adequately with social media and all it’s pitfalls. But how it could be enforced is a mystery.”

A 3rd wrote: “My daughter never had Facebook till she was 14 , even then myself and her Dad monitored what she did etc. At night I had an app that cut off any internet and her phone was given to me at a certain time.”

While a fourth added: “Agree! Until they are in college they should have no social media. Children in school should focus on school assignments, reading, school participation, good performance & excellent grades . There should be no distractions. When they are at home on free time, they should help out their parents with house chores, Etc. Discipline is the only way to be responsible adults.”

Meanwhile, solely three p.c chosen the choice ‘No’ in our ballot, as some urged it could be tough to manage a brand new laws. One reader commented: “There’s no point in bringing in a law that’s impossible to police. First and foremost, it’s a parents responsibility to care for the wellbeing of their child. That includes making the choice of whether social media is having a negative effect.”

Another shared: “In any case they need to be monitored and their content greatly reduced. You can’t ban them. It’ll never work. You can reduce the harm it causes.”

A 3rd added: “They’re not allowed to smoke until they’re 16 or to drink until they’re 18. That doesn’t stop the ones who want to do those things, so how would you prevent them using social media? Where are the parents in all this? Why don’t they have any responsibility for what their children are doing?”

“I think it gets to the point where it is impossible to police and to be fair it is our job as parents to control – as best as we can – what our kids have access to. My daughter (nearly 13) knows I go through her phone and tablet. I use Family Link – she cannot delete her history and I can turn any of her devices off from my phone. She also knows this will continue until she is 16,” shared one other.

Around one p.c chosen the choice ‘Other’ in our ballot.

Please word that the ballot continues to be dwell, so these outcomes might change after the article has been printed.

You can nonetheless vote within the ballot HERE to have your say on the subject. Do you suppose beneath 14s needs to be banned from social media? Let us know your ideas within the feedback part under.