Freedom to raise your kids, and freedom to live your life as you choose, yes. Laws aren’t needed for this. Content management should come from parents, and if websites are pushing agendas or misinformation you don’t want your child on, you should be dictating what they are viewing.
You don’t (lawfully) ban kids from parts of the library because you are worried they might read about things you don’t like, you monitor which books they are reading and tell them not to read such, or discuss why/why not those resources do not agree with or match the principles you agree with.
This is the equivalent of banning kids talking to each other at school, on the bus or at the mall/park. If a platform is pushing harmful information then block that site, or bring a suit against the site for pushing harmful information.
Edit: If you don’t want your kid on certain apps or sites you can start with things like this: https://families.google/familylink/
Don’t force it on other people with laws, I believe parents should have the choice for themselves. Apps like that allow you to block social media sites, restrict their app usage and reset passwords if needed.
So instead of demanding big tech companies monitor their broadcasts, they are banning kids from accessing them, how is that not directed at kids? It is explicitly directed at kids.
They do. The alcohol dealers can only sell via licensed dealers and are punished for selling irresponsible products and to people irresponsibly. To drunk and you sell them more, you can get your licensed revoked, fined and possibly further penalties depending on where you are. If a you sell to a customer and they get drunk you are legally required to provide them with a safe means to get home most places. Whether that be providing a cab if necessary. Usually they will just call it for you, but often times that is them just dodging paying for it as they could be held liable for it. If a drunk driver leaves your establishment and kills someone, the establishment is also held at fault.
The people are told to drink responsibly.
(Not saying alcohol laws are perfect, but yes, they restrict irresponsible sales as they should restrict misinformation, and the company selling it is the one responsible)
Freedom to raise your kids, and freedom to live your life as you choose, yes. Laws aren’t needed for this. Content management should come from parents, and if websites are pushing agendas or misinformation you don’t want your child on, you should be dictating what they are viewing.
You don’t (lawfully) ban kids from parts of the library because you are worried they might read about things you don’t like, you monitor which books they are reading and tell them not to read such, or discuss why/why not those resources do not agree with or match the principles you agree with.
This is the equivalent of banning kids talking to each other at school, on the bus or at the mall/park. If a platform is pushing harmful information then block that site, or bring a suit against the site for pushing harmful information.
Edit: If you don’t want your kid on certain apps or sites you can start with things like this: https://families.google/familylink/ Don’t force it on other people with laws, I believe parents should have the choice for themselves. Apps like that allow you to block social media sites, restrict their app usage and reset passwords if needed.
libraries are carefully curated. Popular “social media” of today is a shit show.
no, it’s not “equivalent” to that at all. Are they banning messengers?
Kids in schools talk through game chat anyways. Are they banning games in Australia?
☞ “Exemptions will apply for health and education services including YouTube, Messenger Kids, WhatsApp, Kids Helpline and Google Classroom.”
this ban is not directed at kids, it’s targeting “big tech”.
So instead of demanding big tech companies monitor their broadcasts, they are banning kids from accessing them, how is that not directed at kids? It is explicitly directed at kids.
it’s illegal to sell alcohol to kids, right? Would you consider that too as “banning kids from accessing them”?
Yes?
Marriam Webster: Ban - to prohibit especially by legal means
they could have just demanded alcoholic beverage companies to monitor their bottles, right?
They do. The alcohol dealers can only sell via licensed dealers and are punished for selling irresponsible products and to people irresponsibly. To drunk and you sell them more, you can get your licensed revoked, fined and possibly further penalties depending on where you are. If a you sell to a customer and they get drunk you are legally required to provide them with a safe means to get home most places. Whether that be providing a cab if necessary. Usually they will just call it for you, but often times that is them just dodging paying for it as they could be held liable for it. If a drunk driver leaves your establishment and kills someone, the establishment is also held at fault.
The people are told to drink responsibly.
(Not saying alcohol laws are perfect, but yes, they restrict irresponsible sales as they should restrict misinformation, and the company selling it is the one responsible)