Reminds me a bit of my own proposal that every porn site should be required to charge 1 cent to make an account, and ban logged-out browsing of porn sites. That way, mommy will notice the charge on her credit card and make the call.
In general I lean towards the Kelsey Piper side of things, and I disagree with your proposal, but it was interesting to read nonetheless.
The novelty of this piece is that it acknowledges multiple issues on all fronts. It's not a simple issue. The propositions make sense to me. (I would need serious time to evaluate to agree any further.) As a culture, I think that we should see a smartphone, perhaps any phone, as similar to operating a motor vehicle with similar assumptions about who is old enough to potentially use it responsibly. That is where I am as a parent, right now.
The First Amendment restrains the government, not private companies. And 'absolute' was never the standard, even against the state: Brandenburg, Miller, Ginsberg v. New York (1968) all carve out exceptions, and Ginsberg specifically upheld letting minors be restricted from material adults can access. Bethel v. Fraser, Morse v. Frederick are relevant as well. The First Amendment never said what you think it says.
I think most of those rulings contradict a plain originalist reading of the text and should be reversed. I do agree it only applies to the government and tech companies are free to voluntarily limit a platform to adults.
Excellent piece. As a parent and someone whose life has traversed both pre and post-online worlds, I'm wholly convinced of Haidt's theses. Concurrently, I'm cognizant that proposed solutions can be ineffective or make things worse. This sounds inherently sensible to me.
This isn't adding value, brother. And it's riding the edge of my reply rules. Please do better in the future.
@AVI WOOLF
@Sarah McLaughlin
@Melanie Hempe, RN
@Catherine Price
@FIRE
@Kelsey Piper
Reminds me a bit of my own proposal that every porn site should be required to charge 1 cent to make an account, and ban logged-out browsing of porn sites. That way, mommy will notice the charge on her credit card and make the call.
In general I lean towards the Kelsey Piper side of things, and I disagree with your proposal, but it was interesting to read nonetheless.
Very reasonable!!
Thank you.
The novelty of this piece is that it acknowledges multiple issues on all fronts. It's not a simple issue. The propositions make sense to me. (I would need serious time to evaluate to agree any further.) As a culture, I think that we should see a smartphone, perhaps any phone, as similar to operating a motor vehicle with similar assumptions about who is old enough to potentially use it responsibly. That is where I am as a parent, right now.
The first amendment doesn't have an age limit. Absolute free speech for all.
The First Amendment restrains the government, not private companies. And 'absolute' was never the standard, even against the state: Brandenburg, Miller, Ginsberg v. New York (1968) all carve out exceptions, and Ginsberg specifically upheld letting minors be restricted from material adults can access. Bethel v. Fraser, Morse v. Frederick are relevant as well. The First Amendment never said what you think it says.
I think most of those rulings contradict a plain originalist reading of the text and should be reversed. I do agree it only applies to the government and tech companies are free to voluntarily limit a platform to adults.
Excellent piece. As a parent and someone whose life has traversed both pre and post-online worlds, I'm wholly convinced of Haidt's theses. Concurrently, I'm cognizant that proposed solutions can be ineffective or make things worse. This sounds inherently sensible to me.