Anthony Albanese - How long? -3-

[Dont_be_a_Plonka]

Murdoch saw a market opportunity for a platform for conservative opinion, which was being sidelined due to “progressive” ideology taking hold. Sky in Australia has over 11 million subscribers. I would say it is the MSM, which is free, that sees itself as “the norm”.

Being able to present alternative views should be seen as healthy in a democracy. Argue against the opinion, rather than attack the platform or the presenter personally.

I subscribe to Sky.
I also subscribe to Arabic love songs, The home shopping network and The Disney Princess channel.

Cause they come lumped in with the Footy etc on Foxtel.

 

[rank and file]

You get free SKY News with Samsung Smart TV purchase.

There's about 3.6 million of them connected to the internet in Australia lol

Subscription by stealth.

LMAO Slow Patrol worked out you can donwload news apps on a smart TV.

 

[Freomaniac]

It's a pity Albo is a below average leader. He's being made to look above average by how utterly useless the Coalition have been since 2020, but let's not forget he was behind in the polls against Peter freaking Dutton a few months out before Trump saved his bacon. I really hope he chooses to move on before the next election.

Sums it up doesn't it?

Albanese isn't terrible, he isn't great either.

He is average while the alternative groups are the coalition who are a shambles and greens who don't have enough support or influence

 

[Freomaniac]

The next election is Albo's to lose.

With the Nationals formally rejecting Net Zero, and the Liberal caucus room being horribly split on the subject because the few remaining Liberal MPs from metropolitan areas around the country are desperate for their party to keep a sensible and non-denialist climate change policy, there's very real concerns that the Lib/Nat coalition will collapse before the next election.

With figures like Barnaby Joyce highly rumoured to be considering a defection to PHON, could we see a situation where the Liberals aren't even in the top 3 parties at the next federal election?

Liberals will still be in the top 2 in the 2028 election. This is regardless if they split from the nationals.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

15 million people voted in the last election.

And we are meant to believe that 11 million of them subscribe to Sky News?

lmao

Didn't Bolts trial reveal only about 170k viewers watched his program? And that was one of the higher rating ones?

 

[Golden_6]

The social media ban is a crock of shit and won't work. In essence, if you could stop kids accessing social media with a flick of the switch and it was as easy as that then it's fine. It's not as simple as that.

The issues are:
1). Kids will just navigate around the system and access social media anyway. I'm sure it's not difficult.
2). Social media is a problem for ALL age groups. I'd argue it's far more destructive for the 18-30 generation and in particular males.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

The social media ban is a crock of shit and won't work. In essence, if you could stop kids accessing social media with a flick of the switch and it was as easy as that then it's fine. It's not as simple as that.

The issues are:
1). Kids will just navigate around the system and access social media anyway. I'm sure it's not difficult.
2). Social media is a problem for ALL age groups. I'd argue it's far more destructive for the 18-30 generation and in particular males.

Including this forum?

 

[Vindicater]

The social media ban is a crock of shit and won't work. In essence, if you could stop kids accessing social media with a flick of the switch and it was as easy as that then it's fine. It's not as simple as that.

The issues are:
1). Kids will just navigate around the system and access social media anyway. I'm sure it's not difficult.
2). Social media is a problem for ALL age groups. I'd argue it's far more destructive for the 18-30 generation and in particular males.

Like all bans it will not stop everyone but it will stop quite a lot.

I agree that it is bad for everyone but a lot are getting hooked early. Again this won't stop people getting addicted to social media but it will stop a lot.

As an idea it is fine. Put into action though I think it will eventually become a nightmare.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Like all bans it will not stop everyone but it will stop quite a lot.

I agree that it is bad for everyone but a lot are getting hooked early. Again this won't stop people getting addicted to social media but it will stop a lot.

As an idea it is fine. Put into action though I think it will eventually become a nightmare.

I agree. I wish it would fix the problems but the smart phone genie is out of the bottle. Still, it’s better than nothing as a start.

 

[Chadwiko]

Liberals will still be in the top 2 in the 2028 election. This is regardless if they split from the nationals.

I'm less certain about that.

Here's the most recent national poll, released yesterday. The trend is awful for the Liberals. They're losing massive ground to PHON.

 

[Not Important]

juice media is so good and accurate with their satire.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

The social media ban is a crock of shit and won't work. In essence, if you could stop kids accessing social media with a flick of the switch and it was as easy as that then it's fine. It's not as simple as that.

The issues are:
1). Kids will just navigate around the system and access social media anyway. I'm sure it's not difficult.
2). Social media is a problem for ALL age groups. I'd argue it's far more destructive for the 18-30 generation and in particular males.

It's really about social norms and the impact on decisions made with younger children today. Device selection that limits available applications by parents will be the best means of enforcing new norms, and any competent parent should have proper parental controls on smartphones that do allow social media apps.

It's time we admit there is a generation of overworked parents who ****ed up screen time to the detriment of their children's long-term happiness & wellbeing. No kid needs a smartphone before the age of 15, they're not missing out on critical life skills or social enrichment by being offline for longer. Parents' decisions have been influenced by peer pressure through friend groups, which is essentially the lowest common denominator, making smartphones the norm among teens.

Those who think the social media ban is negative seem to have a vested interest in the information and media landscape online, and have placed a higher value on social interactions made online & their online social identities.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Interesting that Murdoch is very supportive of the social media ban yet Skynews.com.au has gone down an end of freedom of speech and Labor indoctrination of kids angle.

Amusingly when I commented on this hysterical piece below saying not all parents would agree with the authors contention, my post got deleted. I guess freedom of speech only works in specific circumstances

https://www.skynews.com.au/insights-and-analysis/social-media-ban-comes-into-force-the-left-completes-part-one-of-its-mission-to-indoctrinate-australias-children/news-story/a35f351b0fabd4c314e75b2251a83358

This is a normies vs radicals IDPol split. When you get the Greens and Sky News agreeing for opposite reasons, then you know you're on a good wicket.

 

[WCE777]

It's really about social norms and the impact on decisions made with younger children today. Device selection that limits available applications by parents will be the best means of enforcing new norms, and any competent parent should have proper parental controls on smartphones that do allow social media apps.

It's time we admit there is a generation of overworked parents who ****ed up screen time to the detriment of their children's long-term happiness & wellbeing. No kid needs a smartphone before the age of 15, they're not missing out on critical life skills or social enrichment by being offline for longer. Parents' decisions have been influenced by peer pressure through friend groups, which is essentially the lowest common denominator, making smartphones the norm among teens.

Those who think the social media ban is negative seem to have a vested interest in the information and media landscape online, and have placed a higher value on social interactions made online & their online social identities.

I must say I agree with the majority of your opinion.

What I can't agree with is that those agreeing that the ban is a negative seemed to have a vested interest?
Not sure what you mean when all other your discussion is about parental control and limiting access etc.

I fully agree with the premise that this ban is a a crap idea.
Government should keep out of our houses and families and leave the parenting to parents, period.

Responsible parenting is exactly that, take responsability for our offspring's actions and learnings, limit their access to what you deem acceptable.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

juice media is so good and accurate with their satire.

Its a good political move, those kids will have 2 years to get over it before they get to vote.

It can still come back at them, going in to her first election after being old enough, ( 2016 ), my daughter told me she was still waiting for her free laptop. ( Kevin Rudd - 2007).

Meanwhile :
They are signing up to Lemon8 and Coverstar.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Those who think the social media ban is negative seem to have a vested interest in the information and media landscape online, and have placed a higher value on social interactions made online & their online social identities.

Or those who can see the obvious reality - this is legislation enacted for a single reason - to try to put a dent in the use of social media as it has become, more than any other single thing, an existential threat to the legacy major political parties and their corruption.

The news code was attempt #1, this is attempt #2. The fact we're the only democratic nation worldwide that has attempted these shows just how truly rotten our politicians really are on a global scale.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Like all bans it will not stop everyone but it will stop quite a lot.

I agree that it is bad for everyone but a lot are getting hooked early. Again this won't stop people getting addicted to social media but it will stop a lot.

As an idea it is fine. Put into action though I think it will eventually become a nightmare.

In general kids overuse social media.
Some kids have this online bullying / blackmail thing happening ...no idea how many.

But then there is collateral damage. Just off the top of my head.
-Kids who need to live away from their friends or family for extended periods of time. - Kids with mental or physical conditions, who have an online support group. - Family groups that have split up, and one partner has moved away.

We've automatically assumed the good will outweigh the bad, yet the only information i've heard is politicians giving their opinion. ( never a reliable source ).

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Sums it up doesn't it?

Albanese isn't terrible, he isn't great either.

He is average while the alternative groups are the coalition who are a shambles and greens who don't have enough support or influence

Pretty much. At this point he's just a boring career politician, who has been stagnating since about 2013. But I'll admit, boring career politicians are infinitely preferable to the climate change-denying Muppet show in opposition.

 

[Sinjin Smith]

It's really about social norms and the impact on decisions made with younger children today. Device selection that limits available applications by parents will be the best means of enforcing new norms, and any competent parent should have proper parental controls on smartphones that do allow social media apps.

It's time we admit there is a generation of overworked parents who ****ed up screen time to the detriment of their children's long-term happiness & wellbeing. No kid needs a smartphone before the age of 15, they're not missing out on critical life skills or social enrichment by being offline for longer. Parents' decisions have been influenced by peer pressure through friend groups, which is essentially the lowest common denominator, making smartphones the norm among teens.

Those who think the social media ban is negative seem to have a vested interest in the information and media landscape online, and have placed a higher value on social interactions made online & their online social identities.

It's not that I think the reasons of protecting children from the evils of SM are stupid. What I do think is is stupid is this approach. The SM for kids has bolted......****ing years ago.....kids are so.damn savy of how to circumvent tech controls rendering this whole exercise a waste.

I just cannot look at Albo and Wells standing up there with the pantomime of "saving our kids because you can't". Honestly it's depressing.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

It's not that I think the reasons of protecting children from the evils of SM are stupid. What I do think is is stupid is this approach. The SM for kids has bolted......****ing years ago.....kids are so.damn savy of how to circumvent tech controls rendering this whole exercise a waste.

I just cannot look at Albo and Wells standing up there with the pantomime of "saving our kids because you can't". Honestly it's depressing.

Its just oversimplification of everything.
Its legal for an 18 year old to make pr0n movies. How would you feel if your daughter did it? Is she really mature enough to make that decision.
Meanwhile on the internet a 14 year old can't access facebook, but can watch as much pr0n as he wants if he presses a button that say's he's 18. Girls he goes to school with are probably having sex.
Underage pregnancy ( babies born to females under 20 ) have halved since 2010, is it because of better education and availability of contraception, or other factors. What was the role of unregulated social media in all of that ?
16 year olds can't drink , but some of them are taking drugs.

When my daughter, around 14, caught up with a childhood friend , he sent her dick picks online. She told her mother and unfriended him. What would have happened in the old days...caught up with him on a date? a party ?.

 

[JackOutback]

I must say I agree with the majority of your opinion.

What I can't agree with is that those agreeing that the ban is a negative seemed to have a vested interest?
Not sure what you mean when all other your discussion is about parental control and limiting access etc.

I fully agree with the premise that this ban is a a crap idea.
Government should keep out of our houses and families and leave the parenting to parents, period.

Responsible parenting is exactly that, take responsability for our offspring's actions and learnings, limit their access to what you deem acceptable.

Why must parents take responsibility for every aspect of their child's existence while multimillion-dollar corporations take no responsibility for their behaviours? This isn't incidental consequences, in many respects, social media companies are targeting young people with products they know are harmful. No one thinks cigarette companies should be free to sell smokes to kids and it's the parents' responsibility to manage it. We live in a village, not in isolation.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Sums it up doesn't it?

Albanese isn't terrible, he isn't great either.

He is average while the alternative groups are the coalition who are a shambles and greens who don't have enough support or influence

Hes been given a large runway to make genuine reform and is squandering it

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

When my daughter, around 14, caught up with a childhood friend , he sent her dick picks online. She told her mother and unfriended him.

She should have forwarded them to his mother.

 

[Maddo11]

The social media ban is a crock of shit and won't work. In essence, if you could stop kids accessing social media with a flick of the switch and it was as easy as that then it's fine. It's not as simple as that.

The issues are:
1). Kids will just navigate around the system and access social media anyway. I'm sure it's not difficult.
2). Social media is a problem for ALL age groups. I'd argue it's far more destructive for the 18-30 generation and in particular males.

Twitter promoted me to take a selfie to verify that I'm over 18. I took a photo of only my middle finger and uploaded it and GrokAI approved it.

 

[Gralin]

‘Everyone got paid’: How Wippa’s pro-teen social media ban group cashed in on its success

36 Months accused ban critics of being paid off by big tech. Meanwhile, it was lining up sponsorship deals, eyeing global expansion and coming up with its own AI tool to sell.

www.crikey.com.au