![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
podcast friday
Jan. 2nd, 2026 09:40 amMostly everyone is dormant in the podcast world during Void Week, but Tech Won't Save Us got out a cool one: "How Effective Is Australia's Social Media Age Limit?" with Cam Wilson. Cam has been on the show before, before the ban was implemented. It's now only a week or two into the ban, so early to say if it has done anything good for kids, but he talks a lot about the technical challenges, privacy concerns, and the political and economic interests shaping the ban.
I am flat-out against bans like this (though I will listen to opposing POVs) for a bunch of reasons:
1) The disastrous effect it has on queer and trans kids outside of major urban centres.
2) The fact that there is no equivalent ban for chatbots (meaning that lonely, isolated kids will increasingly turn to chatbots rather than other kids for company).
3) The privacy violations and additional surveillance for adult users (i.e., having to upload their face or donate more information for data-mining to prove their age).
4) My general shitlib opinions about free speech, which includes kids.
5) The methodology of the research that suggests social media is bad for kids. To be clear, I think social media is bad for kids, but I don't think the research is very good at proving it.
6) The lack of anything that addresses the real problems that lead to harmful social media practices, which include inaccessibility of public spaces for youth (and older people!), helicopter parenting/overscheduling, policing of parenting (i.e., parents being disciplined for allowing their kids to roam free), algorithmic instead of chronological timelines and post promotion, the infestation of ads/chatbots/surveillance tech in all social media spaces.
Cam doesn't talk enough about the first two issues imo, but he does have very interesting things about the privacy concerns and especially about how other, non-banning solutions, would have produced better results. For example, forcing these companies to build versions of their platforms that were safe for kids would provide an off-ramp from the block and, by extension, make us aware that a safer, better experience is possible for all of us. He also walks us through the process of the ban, its initial aims, what the final legislation looks like, and the way in which campaigns can gain steam very quickly, become watered down by corporate interests, and ultimately declare total victory based on one or two points.
At any rate, it's interesting to listen to, and I hope he does a followup later on so we can see how it worked out on the ground and if it had any positive effects at all.
I am flat-out against bans like this (though I will listen to opposing POVs) for a bunch of reasons:
1) The disastrous effect it has on queer and trans kids outside of major urban centres.
2) The fact that there is no equivalent ban for chatbots (meaning that lonely, isolated kids will increasingly turn to chatbots rather than other kids for company).
3) The privacy violations and additional surveillance for adult users (i.e., having to upload their face or donate more information for data-mining to prove their age).
4) My general shitlib opinions about free speech, which includes kids.
5) The methodology of the research that suggests social media is bad for kids. To be clear, I think social media is bad for kids, but I don't think the research is very good at proving it.
6) The lack of anything that addresses the real problems that lead to harmful social media practices, which include inaccessibility of public spaces for youth (and older people!), helicopter parenting/overscheduling, policing of parenting (i.e., parents being disciplined for allowing their kids to roam free), algorithmic instead of chronological timelines and post promotion, the infestation of ads/chatbots/surveillance tech in all social media spaces.
Cam doesn't talk enough about the first two issues imo, but he does have very interesting things about the privacy concerns and especially about how other, non-banning solutions, would have produced better results. For example, forcing these companies to build versions of their platforms that were safe for kids would provide an off-ramp from the block and, by extension, make us aware that a safer, better experience is possible for all of us. He also walks us through the process of the ban, its initial aims, what the final legislation looks like, and the way in which campaigns can gain steam very quickly, become watered down by corporate interests, and ultimately declare total victory based on one or two points.
At any rate, it's interesting to listen to, and I hope he does a followup later on so we can see how it worked out on the ground and if it had any positive effects at all.
