Comment by pfdietz
"But think of the children" has always been the go-to excuse for tossing freedom out the window.
"But think of the children" has always been the go-to excuse for tossing freedom out the window.
In the context of government legislation on personal behavior, yes.
Parents should be the ones setting up rules for their children.
Exactly. The problem is no one wants to address that maybe some of these business models just need to go extinct.
Like maybe ad supported infinite feeds can't be done in a socially responsible way and just need to be banned. If that takes down or substantially limits certain web service sizes...so be it.
While I agree with this, I also find that the "but think of the children" ironic retort also usually ignores the very real problems that technology can cause children (and society at large). In this issue in particular, if banning social media for children makes it less likely for adults to use it, I see it as pretty much a win-win.
Would you also want the government to ban junk food and recreational drugs? What about unprotected premarital sex?
I'd much rather live in a society with personal freedoms than a "healthier" one with government mandates on personal behavior.
Literally every society mandates tons of restrictions for children, because we understand that children aren't yet developed enough to be able to understand the full consequences of personal freedoms.
Children are the survival of the species our DNA wires us to to protect them.
That's why people need to be especially careful when others try to use such effective methods of manipulation.
So in this case, do we just stop thinking about the children in totality?