…so why are people so up in arms against bans and restrictions on children having access to social media, where they have even less oversight and can do so themselves?
…so why are people so up in arms against bans and restrictions on children having access to social media, where they have even less oversight and can do so themselves?
Perceived freedoms, similar to the US gun situation. Many Americans feel that the second amendment gives them the right to own any and all weapons, regardless of capability without restriction and any law proposal that comes up that may infringe on that totally unfettered right is met with hostility and uproar.
People aren’t viewing it in terms of safety, they are viewing it in terms of freedom.
This issue is made more egregious by the method in which they are proposing to “protect the children” with many methods completely stripping everyone online of their privacy. Many people, myself included, will die long before they upload an ID to anyone online for the privilege of visiting a website.
This seems very accurate. It’s about perceived “freedom” and not about some actual benefits. “We’ll have guns because we can!” while thousands die needlessly in shootings and “people need to be anonymous on social media” while massive disinformation campaigns dismantle actual freedoms we have. The analogy is made even better by the fact that both are supposed to protect people from tyranny while in reality neither does.