They were holding meetings, testimony or whatever you want to call it about social media platforms and how it affects children. Some of our Congresspeople saying to them, you have blood on your hands. A statement I find a bit dramatic. The purpose is to determine what actions should be taken to make social media "safe" for children. In the past it has always been, just keep the material from the children. But that was back in the old days, before social media and the internet. Back before children had easy access to everything. Back when children had freedom of speech, but there were consequences for that speech. And that is what is central to this argument or discussion. It is freedom of speech.
Does that freedom of speech extend to minor children? Many publications have been withheld from children over the years, by law. Mostly anything that is considered pornographic in nature. Today they teach pornographic subjects in my opinion. I do recall my father having to take me to a special assembly, in the school gym, where an educational film about human reproduction was shown. Yes, it was just "stick" figures, and all the basic components/parts were shown, and their function explained. There were no variations on the theme discussed or other activities related to that process. Yet my generation figured all that out and we weren't confused about our gender.
Social media present a different challenge, however. We can't simply block everyone under a certain age from accessing that stuff. It's just not a possibility. You know locks only exist to keep honest people honest. Nor can we simply say you can't publish any of that stuff. The bottom line is revenue. It is revenue that keeps those platforms online. And another truth is simply that vice sells. That why there is so much of that stuff online. You know the old adage; you can attract more flies with honey than you can vinegar. Those platforms offer what the kids want. Kids today aren't that much different than there were in years past, it is simply the easy access that enables them.
I'm not defending the social media sites or their CEO's, owners or whatever. What I'm asking is, what would you have them do? If they start using AI, algorithms and such to censor content they get sued for violating my first amendment rights to free speech! And we have all seen that with the political stuff. I heard that often when people had their opinions removed and were placed in Facebook jail. I was placed in Facebook jail on multiple occasions! You can't say certain words or phrases without violating their standards. If social media sites started doing that for every topic considered to be harmful, they would soon be out of business.
A great deal of the discussion concerned these "challenges" on Tic-Tok or whatever. They shouldn't be allowed. Well kids have been doing that type of thing since there were children. Remember when you would get double dog dared? You just couldn't refuse that. I'm no different. I recall taking the punk test. Yes, this test would prove if you were tough or just a sissy. The challenge was to allow someone else to rub a quarter on the back of your hand for one hundred strokes. I did, it opened a wound which got infected. Eventually I told my father what I had done, and he just said, well if you're that stupid you deserve it. No talk of suing anyone, blaming anyone else for that. There was a time we thought putting aspirin in your coke would have some special effect, we smoked corn silk, holding your breath until you almost pass out and jumping off the roof. Lots of challenges. I dare you, I double dog dare you.
There was also discussion about the mental health of the children. These platforms are making children commit suicide. They are responsible for the targeting of children. The reality is other children are posting all that stuff just as they used to "post" it on the playground when I was young. That was our social platform, the playground or "clubhouses" we had. Did anyone commit suicide? I would expect there were those that did although I never heard about that. It wasn't a topic of discussion. We talked more about not punching someone in the face when they made you mad, than we did about harming ourselves.
I admit I'm at a loss as to what to do. It isn't as easy as saying the parents should not allow them to use social media. It isn't that simple. The kids today are required to use the internet these days, they are required to have these devices and the ability to access the net. In fact, there are groups insisting we have to close the digital divide and provide all that free of charge to every child in America! Certainly, I feel like parents should be paying attention to all of that. The biggest obstacle is in enforcement. How are these sites supposed to verify who is using the site and their actual age? People lie. Do we really want all our personal documents, what the old folks called our "bona-fides" submitted to every social media platform. Is cyber security so tight that none of that would ever get leaked out.
It's a serious issue no doubt about that. I'm not certain what congress, the public and the administrators are going to do. How do you legislate human behavior? And that is what all of that is, just people being people. Yes, kids will be kids. They can be mean, thoughtless, rebellious, uncaring and encourage others to do stupid things. They are trying to figure out their place in the world and how to navigate that. The world may have grown smaller, but the playground has expanded exponentially. A lot more influences from a much more diverse group of children. Are you up to the challenge? The only thing we can do is try to prepare our children for that, just as our parents did with us. I do think that is where it all has to start, not with blaming social media and expecting them to parent our children. Yes, they play a role, and that role should be monitored and addressed as much as possible. Still, I believe it begins at home.
No comments:
Post a Comment