France Becomes First European Country To Ban Social Media Access For Under-15s (theguardian.com) 121
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: France's parliament has approved a bill banning social media access for children under 15, making it the first European country to bar children from apps such as TikTok. The president, Emmanuel Macron, has championed the ban as a key reform of his final term in office and pledged to enforce it by September. "France is leading the way in Europe when it comes to protecting our children and teenagers," Macron said in a video posted on social media, hailing "a major step forward."
He thanked members of parliament for backing the legislation on Tuesday. "The Constitutional Council must now rule on it, and then it will be time to take action to make this measure a reality and protect our children online," he added on X. After approval by the Senate earlier on Tuesday, members of the National Assembly passed the bill by 279 votes to 81. A growing number of countries are taking steps to restrict social media access amid multiplying warnings over its harmful effects on children.
The ban was to be introduced in two stages, with under-15s blocked from creating new accounts from September 1. The ban would apply to existing accounts from January 2027, according to the legislation. The digital minister, Anne Le Henanff, said before the vote that the timeline was realistic, "because age-verification tools already exist" and others are still in the works, and the onus was on the platforms to impose the rule. "For four months, all of us in France will have to prove our age," she told journalists. "If someone is under 15, the account will be closed." The minister also gave assurances that users' personal data would be protected.
He thanked members of parliament for backing the legislation on Tuesday. "The Constitutional Council must now rule on it, and then it will be time to take action to make this measure a reality and protect our children online," he added on X. After approval by the Senate earlier on Tuesday, members of the National Assembly passed the bill by 279 votes to 81. A growing number of countries are taking steps to restrict social media access amid multiplying warnings over its harmful effects on children.
The ban was to be introduced in two stages, with under-15s blocked from creating new accounts from September 1. The ban would apply to existing accounts from January 2027, according to the legislation. The digital minister, Anne Le Henanff, said before the vote that the timeline was realistic, "because age-verification tools already exist" and others are still in the works, and the onus was on the platforms to impose the rule. "For four months, all of us in France will have to prove our age," she told journalists. "If someone is under 15, the account will be closed." The minister also gave assurances that users' personal data would be protected.
It'd be nice if we had the right article. (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sure the rate of Arctic ice melt is important to know about but it's not what we're here to see.
Re:It'd be nice if we had the right article. (Score:5, Funny)
You most certainly deserve a prize for actually clicking on the article.
Or deep suspicion for possibly being an alien.
I'm not sure which.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe both?
Re:It'd be nice if we had the right article. (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]
And an EU-wide ban has been debated.
Re: (Score:3)
You are doing it wrong! Never click in any references! You may accidentally find out things and not be able to give an position that has no connection to reality anymore!
Re: It'd be nice if we had the right article. (Score:2)
On a similar note I work for a Fortune 500 company with over 100k employees and I was doing our annual workplace conduct training where you're supposed to download the code of conduct and other docs then you need to click that you reviewed. When I clicked the links I got 404s on everything. I emailed HR turns out they failed to properly link any of the documents.
Best of luck... (Score:1)
This is the Big Tabacco moment (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not really about protecting children though, it's about making adults have to prove they're adults by providing ID.
Re:This is the Big Tabacco moment (Score:4, Informative)
It's not really about protecting children though, it's about making adults have to prove they're adults by providing ID.
Australia implemented similar rules last year. I'm a grown-up and I haven't had to submit ID to anyone.
Re: This is the Big Tabacco moment (Score:4, Informative)
It can be both, they're not mutually exclusive. It's good to protect kids, it's bad to degrade privacy. Ideally we'll find a way to protect kids without degrading privacy, I won't hold my breath.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's good to protect kids
Hard disagree. It is good to positively support kids. It is evil to protect them. How will they ever become adults if they are always protected? There is nothing to learn if there is nothing to lose.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a secondary goal, but one that the authoritarian assholes that want everybody watched all the time have had since the Internet became a thing. And these people are unfortunately everywhere, like a stink of rot that is always there once you look more closely.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for that. I hadn't put together how logically inconsistent some of the anti-AI claims are. They can't both be shortsighted bumblers pumping up a bubble and well-organized long-term planners.
I suspect that they are brilliant people, trying desperately to maintain their footing on ground that keeps changing, and flailing about as a result. I mean, "fear our product, it could end the world, but also invest in and use t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: This is the Big Tabacco moment (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Thank you Dr. Johnny Fever....and, watch out for the "phone cops"...those guys play hard ball!!!
Ok...I've just severely dated myself...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Point is, correlation isn't causation. Isn't that Slashdot's favourite catchphrase?
Re: (Score:1)
This is not about children, but more of getting rid of anonymity. A lot of people think that this is a good thing, but it isn't. Ask people speaking out against their repressive governments (and no... the US isn't in this state... yet.). Ask journalists.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem has been recognized as severe. Yes. That is a good thing. But the response to the problem is completely misguided and probably mostly ineffective. The problem is social media addictiveness and it does very much not only affect those younger than 15 years.
Re: (Score:2)
It's been a while coming, but we are finally starting to see the Big Tabacco moment for tech. We have no business placing faith in Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft or Apple as the financials do not match up for appropriate behavior around children.
I understand some of this, but what is your claim that Amazon is messing with people's minds?
French father here... (Score:5, Interesting)
Hello,
I am french, I have 2 kids, now 19 (still a kid?) and 17.
On one hand, I am 100% happy to see that law.
I see way to many people, including my kids (and wife) "suck in" endless scrolling, harassed using these systems.
Furthermore, I see how these systems are designed to "suck you in". And there is almost nothing you can do to fight it (except not go there). Education, training will NOT help you win against these systems who are run by professionals, using psychiatrist, endless A/B testing and resources. If you go on these networks, they will suck more and more of your time, energy, turn you into "human batteries" (aka Matrix) to feed themselves.
On the other side,
- They can also be great tools, blocking access to them can deprive kids from great opportunity. My 17 YO has been running a youtube channel for 3 years now (so, since she was 14), has over 50K subscribers (!) and is using it to bolster her "business" selling hand crafted masks. She has learned so much about so many things through this that it would have been a waste to not let her do it!
- Mandatory age verification will be an imposition on all of us and reduce liberties for everyone
- These are the tools of the area and kids will need to learn how to use them. Blocking them from doing so will render them less effective later.
At the end I think that what should have hapend is that the law should have required these companies to stop being so agressive in trying to lock and keep people in, and also have some good mechanism for controlling "bad speach" (as a self repost?).... The lawmakers look at it, but it was judged unconstitutional and so they went with age verification.
Cyrille
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Give links to your daughter's youtube channel please.
Re: (Score:2)
That is very relevant. I wonder about social media that is more focused on message exchange and expository functions, for example, someone posting a HOWTO, or maybe some way to handle some weird element. Something more forum based and organized along the lines of interests, as opposed to how it is now.
What caused social media to fail is all the "here is some dude who paid some cash and spewing ragebait... he's now in your feed, deal with it. Lets make 3-5 new people a day, all bots, all spewing OPFOR pro
Re: (Score:2)
So no, I don't believe that social media can be done "right".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is ultimately irrelevant and could be said about almost anything.
"Your comfortable with people watching your daughter's ballet recital? You know who else shows up to those?"
There are weirdos for anything and everything. It's just important to teach them of the dangers and how to take whatever actions needed for themselves to feel safe and ok if a creep makes themselves known. You can't really worry, or even do anything, about the creeps that manage to stay completely invisible.
Yeah, Remove the victim not the aggressor... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. The whole thing is barking up the wring tree. Completely. The problem is the addictiveness designed-in into social media because that is their whole business model. And it does not only negatively affect people younger than 15 years.
We can measure and analyze addictiveness. Outlaw it above a certain low level. Imprison CEOs if needed. We do it for drug-dealers.
Surely (Score:2)
It'll go better than Australia's ban...right? You know, the one was quickly and easily bypassed? Because we keep focusing the punishments in the wrong directions. You want to ban teens from social media, punish *the teens* not respecting the ban. Otherwise you're just forcing people who want to use social media to hand over even more personal data to either them or some other untrustworthy third party.
Re: (Score:2)
Because we keep focusing the punishments in the wrong directions. You want to ban teens from social media, punish *the teens* not respecting the ban.
There really is a difference in societal view. No we will never punish children for falling to the tricks of evil megacorps.
Re: (Score:2)
No we will never punish children for falling to the tricks of evil megacorps.
At some point you gotta start putting some responsibility on the individual (and those raising them). Should we punish big businesses when they're bad? Absolutely. Should the business be punished for users bypassing any restrictions that are set up? No. That would be like you getting punished for a random thief breaking into your safe. So, you force the companies to do their best efforts to remove teens without doing weirdly invasive verification and then local authorities work towards finding and punishing
Re: (Score:2)
Our differences cannot be reconciled.
Re: (Score:2)
And are you sure that "society" is what you mean? That's just a group of associated people, more of a property they share than a purpose it has. Institutions have purpose. Governments have purpose. Society is what people find themselves in when they keep interacting with each other.
Re: (Score:2)
You think that society exists for corporations to make money off people.
No, I don't. I just believe everyone is ultimately responsible for themselves.
Is it the the drug cartels and dealers fault that people buy and use illegal drugs? No.
Is it the the drug cartels and dealers fault when people die because of the drugs? Depends. If they cut the drugs with something undisclosed; yes. Person died from simple overdosing or some other user error; no.
Is it the breweries and bars fault that alcoholics exist and sometimes accidentally hurt others? No.
I don't care about what manipulation
Re: (Score:2)
Is it the the drug cartels and dealers fault that people buy and use illegal drugs? No.
Of course it is! Traffickers are the only reason for my ability to purchase drugs, since coca and opium poppy don't grow here.
You think that society exists for corporations to make money off people.
No, I don't.
[...]
I don't care about what manipulations social media companies use or "addictive features" they implement. No one is forced or required to use them.
You seem to believe corporations have some sort of natural right to exist and WTH they want, and if something is wrong, it's people's fault. You put corporations' freedoms above people's interest. I wouldn't generalise to "you people in America" (in the sense of "*all* of Americans") but I would sa
Re: (Score:2)
Traffickers are the only reason for my ability to purchase drugs, since coca and opium poppy don't grow here.
First of all, no. Because not all drugs are plant based. Secondly, you wanted to take drugs. Unless someone was holding a gun to your head forcing you to do drugs or somehow slipped them into you against your will or knowledge, you had to choose to accept any 'first time free' samples. Or you had to choose to go out and find a dealer and pay them. Both sides need to be punished. If you punish the dealer, but not me for willingly buying the drugs, I'll just find another dealer and nothing has been solved.
You seem to believe corporations have some sort of natural right to exist...while corporation follow regulations
No.
Re: (Score:2)
Secondly, you wanted to take drugs.
Being curious at a young age does not make me a bad person. It is now well understood that kids aren't mini adults, they are have immature brains and make what they later understand as unreasonable decisions.
I'll just find another dealer and nothing has been solved.
Go for it. I'd willing to accept your freedom in purchasing drugs. You're not a bad person, you're a victim of the traffickers. Victims don't get punished, they are provided with help (e.g. rehab programmes).
it is clear that authoritarian methods are more efficient in solving certain problems. It does n
Re: (Score:2)
Being curious at a young age does not make me a bad person.
Never said it does. Getting punished doesn't mean you were a bad person.
It is now well understood that kids aren't mini adults, they are have immature brains and make what they later understand as unreasonable decisions.
Which means their punishments should be used as way to teach and guide them.
Go for it. I'd willing to accept your freedom in purchasing drugs.
Than you'll have to be ok with the traffickers never going away. The demand from casual, recreational drug users far outweighs the demand from the high-volume addicts. And if I can get it, so can children.
you're a victim of the traffickers
Recreational drug users are not victims.
Victims don't get punished, they are provided with help (e.g. rehab programmes).
Rehab, when mandated, is a form of punishment that results in helping the individual. Punishment merely means impositio
Re: (Score:2)
You see the problem there, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Define "too easy to get past".
Because a safe that *you* can easily break into and a safe that a *professional* can easily break into are two completely different levels of safe. Ultimately, the problem is a moving target. The perfect safe doesn't exist. If you try to define a bare minimum that is currently somewhere between the two levels, eventually, that bare minimum becomes trivial for all skill levels.
Same with tech. We have literally watched it happen over and over. The first easy example that comes to
Re: (Score:2)
Australia's ban resulted in a 30% reduction in social media use. Also it's like smoking, it doesn't stop the addicts, it reduces the people who aren't yet addicted. Australia is an example of how amazingly successful this regulation is.
Re: (Score:2)
Australia's ban resulted in a 30% reduction in social media use
Not even. 15-20% at best.
Also it's like smoking
In most of the US, it is illegal for minors to possess/use tobacco and alcohol - on top of it being illegal to sell to them nationwide. The minors can be punished with fines, community service, or more depending on location. Australia does similar but lesser for alcohol, but not tobacco. France does neither. Guess which country of the three has the lowest usage of tobacco and alcohol among minors? The US, despite the cutoff being 21 instead of 18. Guess who has the highest? France.
Re: (Score:1)
You think punishing teens for wanting to learn about the world is a good idea? You must be an authoritarian asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, I don't think it's a "good" idea. I just believe that is the only way for the ban to actually have the outcome that the lawmakers claim to desire. I think bans like these are ultimately a waste of time, effort, and money for everyone. It is ineffective and inefficient.
"Age verification tools exist" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The are using the tool of "confidentially state what you want and it will magically come into existence". A mental defect typically found in politicians and some parts of the legal profession.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously not. Then they would admit they have no clue. They are at least smart enough to see that. Well, most are.
Re: (Score:2)
This step is too drastic (Score:2)
And it does nothing to protect 15 year old's and older. A lot of people would need that protection. The right way would be to force the social media companies to fix their act and reduce addictiveness. But that is their whole business model, so they are not going to do that by themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you are clearly an anti-human cretin. So that fits.
Re: (Score:2)
Or or or, and I know this is kind of a wild take, parents (or other caretakers) should do their jobs of raising and educating children better.
Oh, recursive problems? (Score:1)
How should the kids know that they are forbidden to access social media, when the law is posted by the president on social media only?
Ah, well, they are French. They ignore laws they do not like, just like any other French does.
P.S. ... what exactly is social media, anyway? Watching French TV on the official French TV webs site, and then commenting on news is "social me
Making the age barrier at 15, is completely retarded. And the law will likely be attacked in higher courts. With 18 they are allowed to vote
Re: (Score:3)
Making the age barrier at 15, is completely retarded
The age of consent in France is 15. French politicians no doubt set the social media age limit to that number for convenience. It means they can still use social media to contact the teenagers that it's legal for them to fuck.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because it probably would have been legal?
And no customer would have come "for the thrill"?
Or if it was super illegal: he would have been busted right away?
Disclaimer: I only have marginal knowledge about this Epstein stuff :P
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you, it all make sense now! So... why wasn't Epstein operating in France?
That wasn't young enough for him and his customers. It's also a lot easier to hide evidence on your own island than in France. So unless you're more like Roman Polanski than Donald Trump, it's not a great place to hide pedophilia.
Re: (Score:2)
Depending on circumstances the age of consent in Germany is 14.
I do not get your point.
(And I think the age of consent in France is similar, 14 if both are minours, 16 when one is an adult)
Good, maybe under 16 ! (Score:2)
The minister also gave assurances that users' pers (Score:2)
"The minister also gave assurances that users' personal data would be protected."
How about instead of assurances, there are hard, fast, and possibly deadly rules for what happens when users' personal data isn't protected. That'll make them really think about whether they want to link everything to identities.
Ban (Score:3)
An interesting perspective I heard on this from some campaigner on the telly was: it's not banning your kids from accessing social media, it's banning social media companies from accessing your children.
I think that better highlights that we're talking about enterprises with predatory interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but the predatory interests are the people who want you identified no matter where you go. Nobody gives a fuck about the health of kids; otherwise, there would be free school lunches and such.
Didn't UK already ban it? (Score:2)
Wrong link?? (Score:2)
This is so confusing.
Sure, but... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is having sex with under-15s still okay in France?
Yes if both partners are consenting, unpaid and:
* both partners are below 18, or:
* one partner is above 18 and the age difference is less than 5 years.
Source: Art. 222-23-1 CP https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr... [legifrance.gouv.fr]
Article introduced in the Penal Code by Law 2021-478 (21 April 2021). The law: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr... [legifrance.gouv.fr]
This law was discussed following case of a relation between a 28 y.o. man and a 11 y.o. girl known as "Sarah" occurred on 24 April 2017, where the adult could only be punished very lightly as
What does this teach kids? (Score:3)
Early conditioning (Score:2)
I was just flipping through the broadcast TV channels, looking for a good Woodwright's Shop program and I passed by Sesame Street. There's good old Elmo. And Elmo's buddy, a cheerful talking smartphone.
Fuck you, Sesame Street.
race to the bottom (Score:2)
It's a race to the bottom. Soon they will ban social media for the unborn.
Keep slapping thos eband-aids down... (Score:2)
Surely one day they'll stick, right? Even the wettest greasiest skin will dry out and finally they'll stick and the wound will heal, right!?
When will people fucking learn that dumb shit like this is like trying to control weeds by cutting the visible part off. The under 15 crowd will just use other means to get access, and nothing will be fixed. The real solution is to regulate media and marketing, divorce the abuse of psychology from it, impose punishment/fines that aren't a slap on the wrist, then actuall
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Yes, if only someone could go back in time and tell your parents before you were conceived.
Re:Why do people keep having kids? (Score:4, Funny)
Dumb-asses are hell bent on the "continuation of the human race" or some other bullshit. Wish they'd get over it. I'm so glad I was never a kid.
Re: Why do people keep having kids? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why do people keep having kids? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
People have kids for the same reason they play the lottery: because they're terrible at realizing how badly the odds are stacked against them. Big Bang Theory actually said the quiet part out loud and played it for laughs. [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Probably a troll. If not, then abjectly stupid. Would not rule out the second possibility.
Who do you think will keep things running when you retire? Right...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: ...all of us...will have to prove our age... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
My name is on my credit card. Apple knows. That's a problem.
The German system involves your taxpayer ID. The German government knows. That's a problem.
I am still a proponent of buying a (very cheap) card from the grocery store where they record only your birthday in exchange for a QR code that is good for 6 months of activation. It's good enough for buying liquor and cigarrettes. You can pay in cash. No tracking. I'd accept that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Social media does not need to be killed. It has its uses. But any intentional addictiveness must be punished and I mean prison time for the CEO. Any accidental addictiveness must be reduced to sane levels. We have other addictive things and we have a level in society where we tolerate them. Social media cannot remain the outlier that can be far worse unpunished.
Re:...all of us...will have to prove our age... (Score:4, Interesting)
Social media does not need to be killed. It has its uses. But any intentional addictiveness must be punished and I mean prison time for the CEO. Any accidental addictiveness must be reduced to sane levels. We have other addictive things and we have a level in society where we tolerate them. Social media cannot remain the outlier that can be far worse unpunished.
A million times this. After I had to be on Facebook for my work, I figured out their algorithms. I'll use real life examples. I introduced a friend to Facebook. A really decent guy. Conservative, but not overly.
Within a year, he was far right Maga on steroids.
My female relatives:
They were all the stereotype Liberal White Women. Over time, they became raging womanists, to the point if you dared to express any other opinion but theirs, you were subjected to claims that you were misogynist, an example of patriarchal rap culture woman abuser. My wife was on the same group chat, and it's been tough keeping her from the same leanings. Only thing that saved her is she was abused a lot by women (note, men get the blame, but try being a slender attractive woman in a high position)
So okay - what's the common denominator for two groups largely at each other's throats? If you go to FB and see an interesting article or story and click on it, the algorithm stores that, and starts serving you up a little more. Some of those stories or articles might be a little further toward your interest. And people tend to believe what they read. So each new push of the algorithm takes you further. The further you accept, the further it will take you into the fringes.
So now, my female relatives are basket cases, my friend is so far right he is almost unrecognizable.
As an example I shared a store piece from the Babylon Bee that said something like "Woman suspects her husband is using AI when he started sending thoughtful loving replies to her texts." Funny, kinda addresses one of the light hearted versions of male vs female interactions.
The results? my feed was inundated with posts from women who very definitely hate all men. What the actual hell? I had to go through and stop those. Now my feed is getting weird.
There actually are some decent groups on FB if you can get rid of the political bullshit. Meanwhile many people are ruined by it.
Re: (Score:1)
This part of your post really caught my eye...
Did your employer actually state you had to have a FB account in order to perform your job??
If so, I've never heard of such a thing.
I've never had a FB or any other social media site account, and by my accounts...it's actually been beneficial to my lines of work over the years.
So, genuinely curious about this....what kind of job what kind of work if you don't mind me asking....
Thank you in advance...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This part of your post really caught my eye...
Did your employer actually state you had to have a FB account in order to perform your job??
If so, I've never heard of such a thing.
CEO of a 501(c)3 corporation. Part of that job was required social media presence. The main task was providing information on our "mission" and interactions with people. Educational and technical in nature, not unlike the "learn to code" effort. Teaching classes in digital RF comms is a big part.
But Facebook being Facebook, relatives and friends found me. Being an experimentalist by nature, and noting distinct personality shifts and intensity shifts, with people I looked into the reasons for that. That wa
Re: (Score:2)
Punishing Greed. (Score:2)
Social media does not need to be killed. It has its uses. But any intentional addictiveness must be punished and I mean prison time for the CEO.
Uh, let's do a slight clarification here before we start filling prisons under the broad stroke of "intentional addictiveness". Because I can fit a LOT of felons in our society under that.
The average CEO, comes into any company tasked with the job of managing others who tend the existing fields of general progress, success, and survival. In 99% of cases they were NOT the ones who genetically crossed the strains in the lab long ago and sowed the seeds of said empire that grew to be "evil" in the 21st Centu
Re: (Score:2)
You do understand what "intentional" means, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Social media is addictive, and part of growing up to be an adult is to learn how to avoid addictions. Either the addictive power of social media is so strong even adults of sound mind cannot resist (e.g., heroin) or its a skill everyone must learn. How are children supposed to learn it if they are coddled by laws that outright ban it? At the same time banning drugs to protect kids is one thing, but banning speech? That is very novel and new territory. I read the Anxious Generation, and it is very compelling, but I also have kids, and you cannot raise kids that grow up to be healthy adults by relying on nameless government agencies to create a reality distortion field, that actually sets them up for failure. Just like with avoiding ice cream, not getting enough exercise, or watching too much Netflix (also disastrous for health but not being banned...) getting sucked into a social media self-validation loop needs to be taught, not banned.
I grew up before social media existed, yet find myself very capable of resisting it.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool. Not everyone is that capable. Social media abuses psychology to ensnare people and keep them. It's not unlike someone dosing you with heroin without telling you (yeah, this is hyperbole, but only sort of). Sure, you may have no interest in it normally and thus be able to resist any pressure to use it, but when it's being administered in such an insidious way, you just about can't help but become an addict.