Debates of all sorts discussion

20 views
Other > Kids on Facebook

Comments Showing 1-27 of 27 (27 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Brigid ✩ (new)

Brigid ✩ This is a topic suggested by Wednesday: "One thing I saw on the news a while ago is that Facebook is considering lowering the age limit for members, meaning kids under 13 could be able to join (don't think anything is official yet)."

I looked this up, and there is a Washington Post article about it from just a few days ago: http://www.washingtonpost.com/busines...

Although as the article points out, kids younger than 13 are already on Facebook, so I guess the question is ... What would be different if Facebook's rules allowed these kids to join? And what consequences could there be to young kids being on Facebook? Or do you think it wouldn't be a problem?


message 2: by Brigid ✩ (new)

Brigid ✩ Oh. Okay. Guess I'll keep this one then. XD


message 3: by Hazel (last edited Jun 08, 2012 09:30AM) (new)

Hazel | 154 comments I can't see why it would be a problem for some issues, but can see problems elsewhere, you have control over who you add as a friend, and can refuse friend requests, so if you feel the request of a 10 year old to be your friend is inappropriate you can refuse it, and if you don't want the contents of your facebook page seen by people under a certain age, then make it so only friends can see your profile.

However, there are some groups out there that kids should probably not be seeing, and that are completely open to them to look at. At the same time though, a 14 year old should probably also not be seeing certain things. There are some horrific groups out there too - recently a group calling itself "kill all gays" was removed due to the action of many people reporting it, but all it takes is for someone to be careful with the naming and wording of their group, and they could sucker in young and impressionable people. And that includes people over 13. BUt when you consider it that way (that problems include those over 13), then perhaps we shouldn't actually have rules to prevent kids, when their parents should be implementing them themselves.

So, at an individual level, not an issue, at a group level, it becomes more iffy. In the end, it should be up to individual parents to monitor and control what their children are doing online, who they're interacting with, and checking sites/pages/groups for suitability.


message 4: by Isaac (new)

Isaac I have to admit I joined a few months before I joined twelve, but I didn't do anything stupid unlike other kids.

I think middle school age is good enough for Facebook. Elementary is sort of pushing it, I think. The only problem is knowing that the kids will actually know how to function of Facebook. What info will they give out? Who will the accept as friends? What links will they click on? What will they say about others?

Some kids are just very immature on Facebook. Really, a lot of people who aren't kids are as well. The age limit was meant to protect kids, but it won't protect kids and people from other kids and people. There's really no problem with ages if the individual knows how to act appropriately on Facebook.


message 5: by Kogiopsis (new)

Kogiopsis Emily [AVENGERS ASSEMBLE!] wrote: "The only problem is knowing that the kids will actually know how to function of Facebook. What info will they give out? Who will the accept as friends? What links will they click on? What will they say about others?"

this, to me, would be the biggest problem. People who are too young to understand the importance of privacy could get into a lot of trouble with Facebook. I think the major question that raises for me is: how are today's elementary/middle school kids thinking about internet privacy? I'm in college now, so it's been a long time, but when I was in elementary school and first joined Neopets, it was at a time when there was a lot of fear about internet predators, and my parents had talked to me about the risks of putting information out online. For years I kept my info very tightly controlled, and I actually put off joining Facebook for a long while because it required real data. Now the scare factor of all of that has passed and I control for job-appropriateness instead, but still - controlling one's privacy takes a lot of care and thought, and I wonder how many kids have the savvy for it, particularly since I could see Facebook friend counts turning competitive among certain age groups.


message 6: by [deleted user] (new)

I do acknowledge that kids under 13 are still on Facebook because they lie about their age. However, I don't agree with making younger profiles allowable. I don't want my sister, who's 9, to have a Facebook profile. She wouldn't know which information to not put on Facebook, plus she has enough problems with getting distracted and not doing homework.

I just don't think younger children would know how to handle Facebook.


message 7: by [deleted user] (new)

I don't think kids should have free reign on the internet period. They don't need to be on social network sites nor do they need to have the tools available to them to be social with strangers.

There's a large percentage of parents out there who use the internet as a baby sitting tool and in the end it ruins everyone else's good time.


message 8: by [deleted user] (new)

I don't mind kid oriented sites, but sites where anyone of age age can be on it, kids shouldn't be there. I do recognize that adults can pose as kids on kid's websites, but there are still less adults that way than on Facebook.

I just think that their parents should monitor what they do on the internet, and should always keep their computer where it is visable.


message 9: by Brigid ✩ (new)

Brigid ✩ Well, it seems so far that we all pretty much agree ... Obviously, there are already underage kids on Facebook, but as Aleph said that doesn't mean Facebook should willingly open its doors to young kids. Even as an adult, I'm sometimes shocked at how much Facebook provides access to personal information, and how confusing it can be to restrict it from doing so. I can't imagine a young kid would figure out how to deal with restricting such things. Plus, as Paul said, I don't see why kids would want to take part in social media sites anyway ...


message 10: by Isaac (new)

Isaac The only reason kids want to be part of social networking sites is because "it's cool". I know everybody was on Facebook, so I got one.


((It got so unbelievably boring after like a week.))


message 11: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
Yeah, I remember in 7th grade I got a Facebook because my friends had one...I deleted it after a month. I have one again now, but I don't spend much time on it (really it's just for things where texting doesn't really work :P)


message 12: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
It's not pointless - it can be quite useful if used properly. Same with privacy. You just have to be smart about things.


message 13: by [deleted user] (new)

Facebook can be useful, but at the same time it also causes you to waste a lot of time, especially if you play games. However, I used it this weekend to get a hold of my friend because I didn't have his number. It has its purposes, but for the most part, people use it for some pretty pointless stuff.


message 14: by [deleted user] (new)

Well, Facebook isn't for everybody. And everybody has different uses for it. It's your choice if you want to use it, and what you use it for. The point is, young kids shouldn't be on Facebook because they don't know how to use it appropraitely, unless their parents talk to them about what not to post and not to give out information. Also, they should only friend people they know in real life. I think maybe 11 or 12 year olds could have a Facebook if they're parents show them how to use it, but no one younger should have one, and kids need to know how to use Facebook.


message 15: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
As they do with any other site, might I add. This isn't unique to Facebook - if people start giving out personal info over Neopets or whatnot, that would also be problematic.


message 16: by [deleted user] (new)

I think the biggest problem isn't kids being online, it's kids not knowing how to be safe online. I still stand by the fact that young kids should not be on Facebook, but older kids still need guidance for what to post on the internet, who to talk to, which sites are appropriate to join, and of course staying away from porn (which kids still go to porn sites anyway).


message 17: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
Agreed. I mean, in elementary school computer class, we went on the Internet to Google stuff and play games, we just were expected to stay on certain school-approved sites, and everybody was fine.
I don't have a problem with porn as long as kids realize what it is and don't expect reality to be the same. I mean, it's not for 13-year-olds, but older teens should be allowed to watch it...if that's how they want to spend their time...:P


message 18: by [deleted user] (new)

I agree about porn. I don't see why teens shouldn't use it. I mean, teens are curious, and as long as they don't subscribe to and pay for a porn site or use sites that end up giving viruses, I don't see what the issue is. However, younger kids should not be on porn sites.


message 19: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
Why shouldn't they pay for it? I mean, people have subscriptions to Playboy (which isn't a free magazine, I'm sure) etc, what's different here?
But yeah, kids should be kept off. I suppose the only problem with teens is that porn sites use credit card number to verify age, and most 16-year-olds (which I think is a reasonable minimum age for porn) don't have credit cards :/


message 20: by [deleted user] (new)

I think it's the idea of there are free porn sites, and most teens don't have credit cards. I'm mostly trying to say that they don't need to spend their parent's money on porn sites.


message 21: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
They don't need to, but why should they not be allowed to?


message 22: by [deleted user] (new)

I think it would mostly depend on how much it costs, plus if they can just use free sites, why not? It would also depend on the website itself.


message 23: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
Yes, I agree that it should be done for free. However, people do things like subscribe to for-pay versions of sites like Hulu or Pandora just to skip ads, when they can just install AdBlock for free. Why should teens not be allowed to make that sort of choice?
Also, what sort of thing do you mean by "It would also depend on the website itself"?


message 24: by [deleted user] (new)

Is it a trustable website? Honestly, I hate ads, but not enough to pay to use a website that I probably wont' use too much. So, unless it was a website that features a specific fiction series or something that someone likes to watch, I don't see the point of paying.

However, I think we off topic....


message 25: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
Then, if you don't mind continuing this discussion, I'll make a Porn topic.


message 26: by Isaac (new)

Isaac ♥ Rachel♥ wrote: "Yeah, I remember in 7th grade I got a Facebook because my friends had one...I deleted it after a month. I have one again now, but I don't spend much time on it (really it's just for things where te..."

The only reason I use it is so I have an extra tab open just in case my parents come in the room. I'm not necessarily aloud on forums and blogs and such. :P


message 27: by ♥ Rachel♥, Hey, whoa, I'm a mod! (new)

♥ Rachel♥   (i_got_a_jar_of_dirt) | 767 comments Mod
Done.


back to top