Republican lawmakers are proposing blocking kids from accessing social media in schools that receive federal broadband subsidies.

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    2 years ago

    TBH, I’m not generally opposed to this idea. Social media consumption has a lot of negative consequences, and we could all do with a little less in our lives. However, given the source, I don’t trust Republicans to be making these demands in good faith.

    What’s going to be funny, though, is the number of tech-saavy kids who know how VPNs work. 🍿

    • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      The question is whether they will be blocked on school WiFi, or via software on the students’ take home laptops that some schools do. If it’s blocked on the WiFi, the tech savvy kids won’t even need a VPN to get around it. If they have a phone, they can tether it and use their phone’s internet plan instead of the school WiFi. Most android phones have this as a feature.

      • tempest@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        2 years ago

        They all have phones. Which is how most people use social media. There is no need for any of this shit because they will just use their phones with their data plans.

  • foggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    2 years ago

    Y’all know about 5G, right?

    We already block social media at a lot of schools. Doesn’t do shit when all you need to do is disconnect from the schools wifi to see what you want…

    • YIj54yALOJxEsY20eU@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      In before they address this and propose tracking each student’s phone to see if they are in a school zone (and of course to see much more).

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        That would be impossible to do without impacting the ability of neighboring homes to access the internet as well. It’s not like the signals magically stop at the school parking lot.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        School would have to provide the phones, not even close to within our budget

        • YIj54yALOJxEsY20eU@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Not unless we had a large cohort of people doing everything in their power to undermine our freedom and privacy.

          • foggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            No, that’s how public education works.

            You can’t require people have things, you have to provide them. Thats how that works.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 years ago

        I’m sure glad that isn’t true in mine. My daughter called me today to tell me she was really sick and the nurse wasn’t going to send her home. I knew my wife has been really sick and so I knew she needed to go to the doctor. I wouldn’t have even heard about it until after she got home from school if she didn’t have a phone.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Easy enough to setup a wifi hotspot in the bathroom and keep it in your pocket.

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        This varies greatly from district to district. I know of plenty of schools that do the same. But I also know school districts (and luckily live in one) where this would never fly. They tried doing this during my daughter’s sophomore year of high school, and the parents all said “Oh, fucking no. If I want to be able to get in touch with my kid, I’ll make that decision, not you.”

        I also know of districts that tried this and just abandoned the idea because it was nigh-on impossible to enforce without suspending like 90% of the kids.

        • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.worldBannedOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          I also know of districts that tried this and just abandoned the idea because it was nigh-on impossible to enforce without suspending like 90% of the kids.

          That is what is happening. They suspended the Senior class president who was caught with a phone because they were waiting on a college scholarship call.

          • HiddenLychee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            I graduated about ten years ago so cellphones were popular, but not the same culture we have now. I got suspended because my mom called my phone which I had forgotten to turn off while it was in my locker before school started. Turns out I had forgotten a project so not only did I get suspended, I failed an assignment. Schools are great

      • halferect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        How did they get the ok for that? Kids with cell phones can help in active shooter situations so to remove a tool that potentially could save a lot of lives seems crazy

  • just_change_it@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Social media has legitimate research potential. This doesn’t stop any kid from doing what they’re already doing: using social media on their cell phone with cellular data.

    I worry that a bill like this will have riders attached that would change scope drastically. I honestly think in this case it should be up to the school district to self regulate and let the local communities decide what is right in their districts.

  • anon_8675309@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Honestly, I’m generally okay with this. As long as they don’t push some other agenda along with it.

    Social media is, generally, toxic. There are areas that are not but the algos most commercial social media outlets use for engagement are just bad for everyone.

    • Zippy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      It is pretty much technically impossible. Using the phone data plan alone will negate it. I am not against it either in theory but not possible in practice.

      Social Media is little overused. Email is social media in reality.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I know my kids have legitimately used social media at school:

      – for group projects, where the online classroom stuff is useless

      — for current events in various social studies, history, and law and government classes

      As a perfect example, my kid is taking a “virtual high school” class for something his school doesn’t normally offer. They had to use social media to coordinate a group project they just completed . Before someone says the school should provide something, in this case they couldn’t because each member school has their own distinct online classroom stuff that can’t coordinate

  • itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    can’t have students live blogging a school shooting while ducking for cover. That would make their benefactors look bad.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    ), Ted Budd (R-N.C.) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), the bill would require that schools prohibit youths from using social media on their networks to be eligible to for the E-Rate program, which provides lower prices for internet access.

    While the program is broadly supported by Democrats on Capitol Hill and at the Federal Communications Commission and some prominent Republicans, top GOP congressional leaders including Cruz and conservative activists have lashed out against it as a form of wasteful government spending.

    Under the existing program, schools and libraries are ineligible to receive its benefits unless they certify that they have an “Internet safety policy,” including protections against child pornography or other obscene or harmful material.

    “Addictive and distracting social media apps are inviting every evil force on the planet into kids’ classrooms, homes, and minds by giving those who want to abuse or harm children direct access to communicate with them online,” Cruz said in a statement.

    The campaign has gained steam amid building bipartisan concern over the potential negative mental health impact social media platforms can have on younger users.

    The shift is poised to unlock the agency’s Democratic agenda, including efforts to broaden internet affordability programs and to restore broadband regulations such as the Obama-era net neutrality protections.


    The original article contains 698 words, the summary contains 210 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      What a great solution: take a legitimate problem and make a big deal about banning an otherwise useful technology, where that will be ineffective and wouldn’t solve the problem anyway