Should there be an age requirement for ALL social media? If so, what should that age be?

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

This question was something I thought was worth discussing. Representative Stewart from Utah said that he would be putting forth a bill to put an age restriction for social media that would require all users to be 16 and up. There's definitely a reason not to let your kids be on social media (i. e. cyberbullying, grooming risk, the issues it gives attention spans and anxiety, etc.) but there's also reasons not to forbid kids from connecting with their friends, especially if those kids are in bad situations with abusive or neglectful parents. It also brings up the interesting question of what to do for parent-run accounts that often picture or show their children online.

So where do you stand on the matter? Do you agree with Representative Stewart? Disagree? Do you think the age requirement should be lower or higher?

I agree, kids should not be on social media until they're 16 or older

I disagree

Other (Add opinion)

[Weapon77]

As for legality, yes 16 and older really should be our law. Too many shit parents out there are letting 12 year olds have access to unrestricted TikTok, YouTube, Onlyfans, etc., so we have to do what they won't. Personally, I think we shouldn't deal with social mefia until we are 18, but that's personal preference. 16 really makes the most sense for legislature.

[Aerissa_Jade]

I certainly would of done a lot less bad things had I been restricted from social media when I was younger.

Granted what I did as bad, was nothing compared to what others did.

At the very least, I think parents need to be required to monitor their kids accounts and if someone illegal happens they can be partially held responsible for neglect.

[NathanDavis]

they already exist

[Anonymous]

Yes, 18.