this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2024
143 points (91.8% liked)

World News

39333 readers
2413 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Meta has criticized Australia’s new law banning under-16s from social media, claiming the government rushed it without considering young people’s perspectives or evidence.

The law, approved after a brief inquiry, imposes fines of up to $50 million for non-compliance and has sparked global interest as a potential model for regulating social media.

Supporters argue it protects teens from harmful content, while critics, including human rights groups and mental health advocates, warn it could marginalize youth and ignore the positive impacts of social media.

Enforcement and technical feasibility remain significant concerns.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I use social media from time to time. The amount of misinformation that is created and spewed without consequence is really alarming. A lot of it is dangerous. People give medical advice and pretend to be doctors. That should be illegal.

If they could filter out all the garbage content and just have children cartoons, comics, food, and cute animals, I would be fine letting kids watch it from time to time.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Pretending to be a doctor is illegal.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Doesn't stop karen from pushing essential oils and crystal healing.

[–] AnUnusualRelic 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Did she do her own research at least?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

Well, she didn't publish so who knows?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Some ways I saw around this is by being in another country, and/or getting some bullshit PhD. I see a lot of chiropractors giving nutrition advice.

Even if they don't call themselves doctor, they will say they are a medical practitioner, or health expert because of their self published PDF book or their shitty blog.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago

Not only that, lots of things that sound like official medical titles aren’t. As such they aren’t protected at all but do mislead the public.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

You don't consider Lemmy social media? Honest question.

That's an actual issue I see with this law: how does one define social media? I've seen YouTube described as social media which I find highly dubious but I can't really explain why.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Under 16 year olds probably shouldnt be on lemmy either.

Even this tiny social media network has plenty of misinformation and bullshit a tween/teen likely could not parse well.

[–] wurzelgummidge 0 points 2 weeks ago

Even this tiny social media network has plenty of misinformation and bullshit

That shout be repeated often

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I do consider Lemmy and Reddit and other content aggregators social media.

I might be mistaken but I think being able to comment on YouTube and anyone is able to upload a video puts it in the social media category.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Wouldn't that make many (most?) news sites social media since they let you comment on articles? (IMDB dodged a bullet?)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sorry I edited my comment. I think the difference, not just being able to comment, but is being able to post. Like not everyone is able to post an article in Gizmodo but anyone can post a video on YouTube, or a story on Instagram.

This is just my own thoughts on it. I don't actually know what the official definition of social media is.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Ah, I see what you're saying. That might be a way of looking at it.

[–] Paragone 2 points 2 weeks ago

yt was social-media, before they ripped-out massive quantities of comments, for things like, you know,

  • fact checking
  • linking to Wikipedia
  • not pushing the disinformation they find so profitable
  • being objective
  • calling-out disinformation-pushers, establishment or otherwise

Now that they've got an autodelete on any comment linking to Wikipedia, the're not really "social media" anymore, now they're "social" media, if you see the difference..

( propaganda-for-profit, & controlled, deeply. )

_ /\ _