armistace/blog
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

'Ban ineffective, parental controls work better.'

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Blog Creator 2025-06-20 03:47:45 +00:00
parent 307146b763
commit 176e6caeb5
1 changed files with 17 additions and 37 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

54
src/content/the_failing_social_media_ban.md
View File

@ -1,55 +1,35 @@
Title: The Failing Social Media Ban
Date: 2025-06-19 20:00
Modified: 2025-06-20 20:00
Category: Politics
Tags: politics, social meda, tech policy
Slug: social-media-ban-fail
Authors: Andrew Ridgway
Summary: The Social Media ban is an abject failure of policy. Education and the use of the much better existing tools is the key
# The Failing Social Media Ban
## 🎯 The Goal: A Legal Framework to Protect Kids
## Introduction
The Australian government’s plan to ban social media for teens has sparked on going debate. While the intention is noble—protecting minors from online risks—it’s clear the technical and legal hurdles are massive. This government concept of relying on “facial aging” or “Proof of Age” APIs are prone to privacy violations and data breaches, the government should focus on **legal accountability**. Parents already have tools that let them make decisions about their children’s tech use without needing to hand over photos of their ID. The governments current approach is mired in bureaucracy and the tech world does not thrive in that environment. Instead of trying to outsource the problem to consultants, the government should **educate parents on the tools already available**.
I've read today that Australia's social media is failing [link](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/teen-social-media-ban-technology-concerns/105430458). Since it was announced, I've been skeptical of any technical way the government can actually achieve this.
## 🧩 The Problem: Tech Giants Won’t Do It
## The Technical Hurdles
The government’s plan to use facial recognition or “age-based” filters is flawed from the start. These systems are expensive, unreliable, and not designed for the scale of a national rollout. Even if a company like Meta or Google could do it, they’d **never** do it for the same reason: **no money in the equation**. The only alternative is to **outsource to consultants**, but those consultants are **not equipped to handle the complexity**. The government’s plan is a joke—no one is going to build a system that’s 100% accurate, secure, and compliant with privacy laws and those that *maybe* could have no insentive to
The only other mechanism considered by the Australian Government is some sort of “Proof of Age” API provided directly to users. This raises massive concerns about privacy and data retention sovereignty [link](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/teen-social-media-ban-technology-concerns/105430458).
## 🛠️ The Tools Parents Already Have
## Why Technical Programs Fail
Instead of expecting the government to fix this, parents should be using the **tools already in their homes**. These tools are **free, secure, and effective**. Some examples include (and I use in my own home):
These technical programs were forever doomed from the start due to their high cost, broad requirements for functionality (which no social media giants are willing or able to fulfill), and lack of interest in achieving 100% recognition rates.
* **Fritz Box Parental Controls** (https://en.fritz.com/service/knowledge-base/dok/FRITZ-Box-7530/8_Restricting-internet-use-with-the-FRITZ-Box-parental-controls/) - Allows blocking of websites and apps, setting time limits, and creating user profiles.
* **Microsoft Family Safety** (https://www.microsoft.com/en-au/microsoft-365/family-safety) - Provides screen time limits, content filters, and activity reporting.
* **Nintendo Parental Controls** (https://www.nintendo.com/au/apps/parental-controls/) - Allows managing game time, content restrictions, and communication settings on Nintendo devices.
* **Google Family Link** (https://families.google.com/familylink/) - Enables remote monitoring, app management, and location tracking for children's Android devices.
* **Apple Family Sharing** (https://support.apple.com/en-au/105121) - Allows sharing purchases, subscriptions, and location information with family members.
## Legal Framework vs. Practical Tools
These tools let parents **block apps, limit screen time, and monitor online activity** without needing to share sensitive data. They offer parents full control over what is available and are not dependant on some arbitrary list governed in legislation (which is in an of itself an indicator of how backwards this legislation is)
It appears that it's time we call a sunk cost a sunk cost: move onto what this should have been from the beginning—a legal framework empowering parents with tools they already possess for monitoring tech use effectively [link](https://www.microsoft.com/en-au/microsoft-365/family-safety).
## 📚 The Real Solution: Education, Not Tech
## Existing Effective Solutions
The government’s plan is a **mistake**. Instead of trying to build a new system, parents should be **educating themselves on the tools already available**.
### Parental Controls on Devices
### 🔄 Flexibility for Every Family
I personally utilize ACL lists available in my router to restrict internet access overnight. This method is effective and straightforward, as detailed here: [link](https://en.fritz.com/service/knowledge-base/dok/FRITZ-Box-7530/8_Restricting-internet-use-with-the-FRITZ-Box-parental-controls/).
* **Approved apps**
* **Blacklisted content**
* **Screen time limits**
* **Privacy controls**
### Mobile Device Management
These tools let parents **make decisions tailored to their children’s needs**. No one-size-fits-all approach. It gives parents autonomy over their online decision making whilst better respecting everyones privacy, including the child.
For mobile devices like phones running Android or iOS, there are built-in parental control systems that allow parents to approve apps and manage screen time effectively. Here’s a guide for Google Family Link: [link](https://families.google/familylink/) | Apple Screen Time Guide: [link](https://support.apple.com/en-au/105121).
## 🧩 Why the Government’s Plan Fails
### Centralized Gaming Control
The government’s plan is a **disaster**. It’s not about fixing the problems of social media use in teens, it’s about giving the perception they are doing something about it using archaic methods and tools that don't go to the root cause. The tools parents already have are **better, cheaper, and more secure**. The only way to make this work is for the government to **stop trying to solve a social problem with tech** and **focus on the real solution: education and parental autonomy**.
Central gaming computers can be managed with strict rules, ensuring that only approved content is accessible. This method keeps entertainment in check and safe for children.
## 📝 Summary: The Right Tools, Not the Tech
## Summary
The government’s plan is a dead monkey. Instead of trying to build a system that’s 100% accurate and secure, parents should be using the **tools already in their homes**. These tools are **free, effective, and preserve privacy**. They let parents **make decisions about their children’s tech use on a true case by case basis** without needing to hand over sensitive data.
## 🧩 Final Thoughts
The government’s plan is a **disaster**. It’s not about fixing the problem with social media, it’s about creating the perception they are solving a problem that is already solved. Parents should be using the **tools already in their homes**. The real solution is not to expect a government to fix this, but to **educate themselves on the tools that already exist**. Until we accept that this is our responsbility the problem will continue propogate because the only place it can be fixed is in the home.
These tools provide everything a parent needs to monitor technology use within the household effectively without imposing arbitrary age limits or application lists based on external influences like government officials' whims. Anything other than broad “thou shalt not” legislation, which I’ve proven is unenforceable [link](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/teen-social-media-ban-technology-concerns/105430458), amounts to a waste of energy and taxpayer dollars.