Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban?

<-- Free Speech: Censoring, Restricting and Repealing?

The ramming through of the under-16 social media ban demonstrates the ongoing failure of representative democracy dominated by the two major political parties. 

This legislation has united often bitter political opponents in their condemnation of the stifling of debate, best summarized by Senator Sarah Hanson-Young of the Greens in her statement to parliament.

"The true object of this legislation is not to make social media safe by design, but to make parents and voters feel like the government is doing something about it." Zoe Daniels MP

The stifling of debate is nothing new. It is part of a broad strategy by the two major political parties of controlling the narrative in order to maintain power. 

Open democracy provides an opportunity to debate and vote on the issue and, if broadly agreed, to repeal the law. 

HAVE YOUR SAY

Option 1: This legislation is necessary to protect children from social harm. I support and endorse it.

Option 2: This legislation represents a continuation of the pandemic-era idea of government knows best. It is ill-thought out, unworkable and because it will potentially do more harm to children than good, should be repealed. 

While this relates to an Australian issue, all feedback is welcome because the protection of free speech is a global concern.

___

RELATED

A better solution starts with ending the postmodern crime againsts humanity.

***