- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The effort to ban social media for kids in the UK is just part of a larger censorship plan
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:30 am to Placekicker
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:30 am to Placekicker
quote:
Step 3: bring in the consequences - arrests, travel ban, debunking, for out-of-bounds speech
BINGO
This is what posters like Eurocat, VOR, Tboy, 56, BeauxDuke, etc want.
You will then be labeled a racist over anything you post or read they disagree with. Next, there will be exceptions from all of this for radical islam and left wing groups. Then come the arrests for wrong think.
The meme with the cop in a hijab immediately comes to mind.
0
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:30 am to Eurocat
quote:
Because a lot are either too busy or dumb to it. That is why. And I don't live in some libertarian fantasyland that every person on the earth is good, educated, disciplined, well intentioned, industrious. Many people suck. This is not directed at you personally of course.
Govt regulation of speech, or access to speech, is not an acceptable solution for bad parenting. I wouldn't have a big problem with regulating young children's access to the internet, as long as it was done across all content and didn't impact adults at all. But that's not the plan. As you point out, many people suck and those people will use this to limit speech, or access thereto, of those who disagree with them.
This post was edited on 6/16/26 at 9:39 am
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:32 am to gaetti15
Kids are so maleable, too. I’ve mentioned to my kids that I prefer them to eat off of real plates and they can’t put plastic in the microwave because I don’t want them ingesting the microplastics. I’ve said this no more than 10-20 times ever and the other day my daughter (about to turn 7) asked me to reach a glass for her because she didn’t want to drink out of the plastic cup my husband had given her. Kids internalize a lot of what we tell them - for better or worse.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:33 am to Placekicker
This whole effort is a classic. Never heard of the Motte and Bailey logical fallacy?
Motte: Social Media is dangerous! Kids 16 and under need to be protected!.
Bailey: Everyone will be required to identify themselves to use the internet. All online activities will be monitored.
It is also a meme: "Won't someone think of the children!"
So transparent and obvious.
And they are falling for it.
Motte: Social Media is dangerous! Kids 16 and under need to be protected!.
Bailey: Everyone will be required to identify themselves to use the internet. All online activities will be monitored.
It is also a meme: "Won't someone think of the children!"
So transparent and obvious.
And they are falling for it.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:34 am to RemouladeSawce
quote:
Nah. Rare UK win. No kid should be on social media. Way too high a proven societal cost
I don’t know how anyone can look around at all the mentally ill youth running around and have issue with this. It’s beyond out of touch with reality.
Keir Starmer got ratioed and community noted with his own government's research showing little correlation and no causation between children's behavior and use of social media.
John Stossel has covered this topic as well, and found that kids today are affected by social media about the same as kids were affected by violent video games in the 90s or rock music during the Satanic Panic. In other words, little impact at all.
If BlueSky is exempt from this ban as has been reported, there's really no argument for the government to ban any platform. It has zero to do with protecting children.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:35 am to Eurocat
quote:
Paranoid talk. Let's not have speed limits either and let there be no controls on things like cocaine, etc. Cmon.
If i had said in 2019 that the government would be arresting people for paddleboarding alone it would have been called "paranoid."
Roads are a public place so its much different than what you can limit people doing in their own homes.
Should we control things like permiscuous sex because of the elevated risk of STDs?
Sorry youre such a shite parent that you cant stop your kids from doing something bad for them.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:35 am to funnystuff
quote:
. Get kids the frick off social media.
That's a completely separate issue from what the UK government is doing with this "child protection" racket.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:57 am to 4cubbies
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Kids are so maleable, too. I’ve mentioned to my kids that I prefer them to eat off of real plates and they can’t put plastic in the microwave because I don’t want them ingesting the microplastics. I’ve said this no more than 10-20 times ever and the other day my daughter (about to turn 7) asked me to reach a glass for her because she didn’t want to drink out of the plastic cup my husband had given her. Kids internalize a lot of what we tell them - for better or worse.
Cubbies, I completely agree with your post.
What I find interesting is that Bluesky is exempt from the social media ban.
Check out the X post, some of the folks who frequent Bluesky are advertising themselves as “minor attracted.”
To me, if he were truly interested in protecting the children, this would be the first platform to be banned.
Wonder why he permitted it to be exempt?
Posted on 6/16/26 at 9:59 am to Placekicker
Always triggered by children.
Gun Control is not about protecting children, it’s so you disarm citizens to resist tyranny
Gun Control is not about protecting children, it’s so you disarm citizens to resist tyranny
Posted on 6/16/26 at 10:02 am to riccoar
quote:
Always triggered by children.
Gun Control is not about protecting children, it’s so you disarm citizens to resist tyranny
Holy shite, I never saw that this thread turned to gun control
Posted on 6/16/26 at 10:05 am to funnystuff
quote:
The only people against this are people who don’t have kids.
False. If you think the UK government is doing this for anything other than their own sociopolitical agenda you are extremely naive.
This will allow the UK state entity to entirely control the sociopolitical narrative that their youth are exposed to. Social media, while certainly having negative impacts on children, also exposes them to non-state sponsored narratives, news, and content.
They aren't doing this for the psychological benefits to the children. This is political through and through.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 10:22 am to ChewyDante
quote:
This will allow the UK state entity to entirely control the sociopolitical narrative that their youth are exposed to. Social media, while certainly having negative impacts on children, also exposes them to non-state sponsored narratives, news, and content.
This is the correct answer. This is about indoctrination of the youth with what the Globalists want them to believe.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 10:25 am to ChewyDante
quote:
They aren't doing this for the psychological benefits to the children. This is political through and through.
Bingo, and every leftist in this thread knows this.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 10:31 am to Placekicker
No doubt Amelia with purple hair will be first on the ban list.
Posted on 6/16/26 at 10:35 am to Auburn1968
quote:
No doubt Amelia with purple hair will be first on the ban list.
1000%
Posted on 6/16/26 at 10:50 am to dgnx6
Are you really equating complaints against private enterprise age restrictions with complaints about federal or state age restriction LAWS?
Posted on 6/16/26 at 2:56 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
If you think the UK government is doing this for anything other than their own sociopolitical agenda you are extremely naive.
This will allow the UK state entity to entirely control the sociopolitical narrative that their youth are exposed to. Social media, while certainly having negative impacts on children, also exposes them to non-state sponsored narratives, news, and content.
They aren't doing this for the psychological benefits to the children. This is political through and through.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 6/16/26 at 3:38 pm to Placekicker
Posted on 6/16/26 at 3:41 pm to Placekicker
Don't want them exposed to online "misinformation," now.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News