Kids Off Social Media? Corporates Cry Foul
Australia bans under‑16s, and the lobbyists sharpen their knives.
Story: S A Spencer
Author of Popular Fictions: The Pink Mutiny, The Black Waters, Dream In Shackles
Australia has finally
done the unthinkable: told kids under 16 to log off. A radical idea,
apparently, that children should spend less time being algorithmic guinea pigs.
Other countries are eyeing the move, but the big corporates in the United
States are clutching their pearls. Why? Because fewer teenagers online means
fewer eyeballs to monetise, fewer dopamine hits to sell, and fewer ad dollars
to hoard.
To show how this plays
out behind closed doors, here’s a fictional noir‑comic scene — a corporate
agent whispering sweet threats to a politician — with commentary that cuts
through the spin.
Panel 1 – Hotel Bar, Washington D.C.
Agent: “Australia’s ban is contagious. If Europe copies
them, our profits bleed.”
Politician: “So what’s the play?”
Commentary: Translation: “If kids stop scrolling, our
shareholders stop smiling.” Forget public health — the real emergency is a dip
in quarterly earnings.
Panel 2 – Close-up, Agent’s smirk
Agent: “We call it censorship. Freedom sells better than
child safety.”
Commentary: Ah yes, the freedom to be tracked, profiled, and
advertised to before you’ve finished puberty. Nothing screams liberty like a
targeted ad for acne cream.
Panel 3 – Politician swirling whiskey
Politician: “And if they don’t listen?”
Agent: “We remind them who controls the trade levers.”
Commentary: When persuasion fails, there’s always economic
blackmail. Nothing says “respect our values” like threatening to tank your
exports unless your kids keep doom‑scrolling.
Panel 4 – Split frame tension
Agent: “Campaign funds. Media pressure. A little
diplomatic muscle.”
Commentary: The holy trinity of corporate influence: cash,
headlines, and a wink from a diplomat. Who needs voters when you’ve got
lobbyists?
Panel 5 – Wide shot, bar fades into shadow
Politician: “So we bully them into compliance.”
Agent: “Exactly. Protect the platform, protect the profits.”
Commentary: Finally, some honesty. It’s not about protecting
children, democracy, or freedom. It’s about protecting the bottom line — and
bullying anyone who dares to interfere.
Panel 6 – Cliffhanger
Caption: “The storm is coming. Will they resist, or fold?”
Commentary: Smaller nations now face the corporate equivalent
of a schoolyard bully. The question isn’t whether kids should be safe online —
it’s whether governments have the spine to tell billion‑dollar companies to
shove it.
The Corporate Playbook
If this were a sports
match, the corporates would be playing rugby with brass knuckles. Their tactics
are well‑worn:
- Rebrand the problem: Child safety becomes “government overreach.”
- Weaponise freedom: Every restriction is painted as censorship,
even if it’s just bedtime for teenagers.
- Deploy the lobbyists: Politicians are reminded who pays for their
campaign ads.
- Threaten the economy: Trade deals suddenly hinge on whether your 14‑year‑old
can post dance videos.
- Spin the media: Headlines scream “Australia bans free
speech,” while the fine print whispers “actually, it’s just TikTok for
kids.”
It’s less a playbook than
a pantomime, but it works because money talks louder than common sense.
What Happens Next
Picture it:
- Australia holds firm. Corporates sulk, but the precedent is set.
Other nations quietly copy the move, and suddenly the under‑16 market
shrinks. Cue panic in boardrooms.
- Or, the corporates win. Lobbyists flood capitals, politicians fold
faster than a cheap deckchair, and the bans are watered down. Kids keep
scrolling, profits keep flowing, and the “freedom” narrative triumphs.
- Or, the middle ground. Nations introduce half‑hearted restrictions —
curfews, parental controls — while corporates invent loopholes big enough
to drive a truck through. Everyone pretends progress has been made, while
the algorithms keep humming.
Whichever way it goes,
the fight isn’t about children. It’s about who controls the narrative —
governments trying to look responsible, or corporates trying to look
indispensable.
Conclusion
Australia’s ban is a test
case. If it holds, other countries might follow. If it crumbles under corporate
pressure, the message is clear: profits trump children, every time.
The irony? The same
companies that market themselves as champions of “community” and “connection”
are desperate to keep kids hooked, no matter the cost. The next chapter in this
saga will reveal whether governments value childhood more than corporate dividends
— or whether the lobbyists win yet again.
S A Spencer- I will bring more stories for your entertainment. Please follow me on Facebook and Twitter so that you know when a new story comes.
Do you like this story? Let your friends also read this.
Download this thriller -FREE for a limited time


Beautiful
ReplyDelete