Banning TikTok

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Ladies and gentlemen, the "Free State of Florida."

You want to send your kid to public school without being vaccinated against deadly infectious diseases?  We respect your solemn rights as a parent.
You want to allow your 13-year-old to use TikTok or Facebook?  The state must intervene to protect your child's safety.

As if this will stop any kid who passed second grade math.  Any 9 year old who wants a facebook account will figure out what year they need to enter to get one granted.  Or for that matter just select a different state when registering.  .  

[Dave Gray]

While what you're saying is true, it does give parents an extra tool.  Kids can break the law and their parents consent, but a lot of them won't.

I don't even think it's the right thing to do necessarily, but I do understand it.

[Fau Teixeira]

1 - i don't think banning tiktok is in any way constitutional, and runs afoul of the 1st amendment
2 - the hypocrisy in florida is astounding, the "freedom" state banning books and websites

[Spider-Dan]

When you ask Florida Republicans "Which is more dangerous to children: using Facebook or catching measles?", their answer is loud and clear.

[CF DolFan]

1 - i don't think banning tiktok is in any way constitutional, and runs afoul of the 1st amendment
2 - the hypocrisy in florida is astounding, the "freedom" state banning books and websites

No books have been banned. You can purchase any book you that want including all of the ones on any banned list circulated by hysterical liberals. Each school district is responsible for ensuring all the materials in their schools adhere to state education standards but nobody is stopping you from reading whatever you want.

I'm ok with the social media restrictions only because everyone knows it's bad for you and worse when you're a child. Hell, most adults get carried away with free speech online and can't handle it and we expect kids to be able to? Are they going to require proof of age or something? I haven't read or seen much about this.

[Dave Gray]

My initial guess is that this is just sort of a "lip service" type bill and it will require you to put in a State and an age at signup and people will just lie about it and create the profile anyway.
A level up from that would be to require some sort of age identification with a credit card or something, like they do with Texas and porn sites.

It might also be used to harass and condemn people after the fact -- like your kid does something and then everyone latches onto that they had a social media account illegally.

[Spider-Dan]

No books have been banned. You can purchase any book you that want including all of the ones on any banned list circulated by hysterical liberals. Each school district is responsible for ensuring all the materials in their schools adhere to state education standards but nobody is stopping you from reading whatever you want.

Florida's state government has banned these books in schools, which is the point.

This kind of equivocating on "the books aren't technically banned if you can still buy them" doesn't fool anyone.  By this logic, there hasn't been a vaccine "mandate" anywhere in America... only if you want to use certain public resources, which no one is forcing you to do!

I'm ok with the social media restrictions only because everyone knows it's bad for you and worse when you're a child.

In Florida, a parent has the right to choose not to give their child a vaccine for a deadly infectious disease, but does NOT have the right to allow their child to use social media.  Do you agree with this?

[Spider-Dan]

My initial guess is that this is just sort of a "lip service" type bill and it will require you to put in a State and an age at signup and people will just lie about it and create the profile anyway.

I'm surprised you and Hoodie don't see the problem here.  It doesn't matter if you can easily evade the law; by criminalizing the act, it just enables persecution.

To take the comparison further: women who live in Texas can secretly drive to New Mexico for an abortion, but that doesn't diminish the Texas anti-abortion law (SB8) that allows any random person to sue any woman they "suspect" of having an abortion.

[Dave Gray]

^I do see that problem there.  That's why I brought it up.

The idea that the law will sit idle and you can persecute after the fact is a bad thing.

[Phishfan]

We don't allow minors to do a lot of things with age restrictions attached such as drinking, smoking, driving and entering into legal contracts. I don't use anything more social media than this site but wouldn't the terms and conditions on these platforms be considered contracts? If a minor cannot enter into contracts doesn't that preclude them from being able to use the platforms? Just something that popped into my head.

[CF DolFan]

Florida's state government has banned these books in schools, which is the point.

You also can't watch the typical Ron Jeremy movies in school. Are you against all standards or just ones that don't fit you personally?

This kind of equivocating on "the books aren't technically banned if you can still buy them" doesn't fool anyone.  By this logic, there hasn't been a vaccine "mandate" anywhere in America... only if you want to use certain public resources, which no one is forcing you to do!
In Florida, a parent has the right to choose not to give their child a vaccine for a deadly infectious disease, but does NOT have the right to allow their child to use social media.  Do you agree with this?

Yes. Kids can't purchase tobacco products, buy beer or guns because of the harm it would do to them. Social media is just a different kind of harm that pretty much everyone agrees is bad for them. We are supposedly against bullying but every ad and most posts are meant to tell them they aren't good enough as they are. Makes no sense.  

We don't allow minors to do a lot of things with age restrictions attached such as drinking, smoking, driving and entering into legal contracts. I don't use anything more social media than this site but wouldn't the terms and conditions on these platforms be considered contracts? If a minor cannot enter into contracts doesn't that preclude them from being able to use the platforms? Just something that popped into my head.

That's an interesting point. Is agreeing to rules a contract? While I guess we have our opinions here legally I could see that being an issue.

[Spider-Dan]

You also can't watch the typical Ron Jeremy movies in school. Are you against all standards or just ones that don't fit you personally?

A book about a kid with two moms is not equivalent to pornography.
Neither is a book that discusses slavery.

Yes. Kids can't purchase tobacco products, buy beer or guns because of the harm it would do to them. Social media is just a different kind of harm that pretty much everyone agrees is bad for them.

Measles causes harm to children; so do polio, mumps, and COVID.  Yet you support the right of parents to put their children at risk by not vaccinating them.
So why are you "pro-freedom" in the case of vaccines but "pro-safety" in the case of social media?

Let's keep in mind that the left isn't out here shouting every day about how "Pro Freedom" or "Pro Free Speech" they are; "Free State of Florida" is a moniker that y'all made up, not us.  Yet now you're in the position of having to justify not only the hundreds of books that have been banned in Florida schools, but the state government telling parents that they aren't allowed to decide for themselves whether their child can handle using Facebook.

[Dave Gray]

I see the merit in regulating social media -- both from overseas interest and for kids.

However, I really just don't trust the messenger, in this case.  Ron Desantis has been one of these agitator type leaders.  Frankly, he's an asshole to me on a regular basis and I'm one of his constituents, so when it's time to meet in the middle when we agree that something is an issue, I just don't take the guy at face value.  I said of Rick Scott, another politician I greatly dislike, "say what you will, but that man can manage a hurricane".  He and I were opposite on policy, but he wasn't sticking it to me and blaming me for all of the State's woes.

The one good thing I've seen Desantis do is veto a GOP led bill that would screw solar power growth in the State.  Good on him, though it was a low bar -- I'm sure he took some shit from some rich people who lost out on the grift.

Outside of that, though, he spent his time as governor with stuntwork style legislation, equating everything to wokeness.  So, I don't know what that says about me, but I'm very hesitant to trust his leadership, because up to this point, I don't feel that he's been governing in good faith.

[CF DolFan]

I see the merit in regulating social media -- both from overseas interest and for kids.

However, I really just don't trust the messenger, in this case.  Ron Desantis has been one of these agitator type leaders.  Frankly, he's an asshole to me on a regular basis and I'm one of his constituents, so when it's time to meet in the middle when we agree that something is an issue, I just don't take the guy at face value.  I said of Rick Scott, another politician I greatly dislike, "say what you will, but that man can manage a hurricane".  He and I were opposite on policy, but he wasn't sticking it to me and blaming me for all of the State's woes.

The one good thing I've seen Desantis do is veto a GOP led bill that would screw solar power growth in the State.  Good on him, though it was a low bar -- I'm sure he took some shit from some rich people who lost out on the grift.

Outside of that, though, he spent his time as governor with stuntwork style legislation, equating everything to wokeness.  So, I don't know what that says about me, but I'm very hesitant to trust his leadership, because up to this point, I don't feel that he's been governing in good faith.

I just read this article thought of you. It's a Progressive who is backing DeSantis on this law.


Opinion: I can’t believe Ron DeSantis is right about this, but he is

CNN- As a progressive, I never thought I’d write this sentence: A law just signed by Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis is brilliant — and should be a model for the nation.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/03/opinions/florida-social-media-law-desantis-is-right-alaimo-wellness/index.html

[Spider-Dan]

It's generally more effective to read the article you're citing and summarize the point being made, as the "Even the liberal [x] agrees with us" argument deployed frequently by Republicans (even when referring to people like Tulsi Gabbard, Glenn Greenwald, or Matt Taibbi as "liberal" when they have ditched the left long ago) has lost all gravity.  It's just not a persuasive argument to point at some "liberal" that agrees with you.

That said: the author in question has written a book on the dangers of social media, so it's not surprising that she's in favor of banning it for kids.  Fair-minded people can have a reasonable discussion about censorship and where it is necessary for the greater safety of our society.

But that's not what the "Free State of Florida" is supposed to be about.  The "Free State of Florida" is supposed to put freedom ahead of the government dictating to you and your family what is and isn't safe.  So while I would have no particular issue with a social media ban for kids in a state that cares about the safety of kids, in a state where the surgeon general is giving the thumbs up to unvaccinated kids being sent to school during a measles outbreak, I don't want to hear about the dangers of Instagram.  Florida Republicans are banning social media for kids as a political stunt, because those are the only kind of policies MAGA Republicans are interested in: political stunts.