M576 – Motion on the handover of social media data to Psychiatrists Watch

This discussion is closed.
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#1
M576 – Motion on the handover of social media data to Psychiatrists, The Mogg MP

This house calls upon the government not to pressure or force social media companies into giving data on children's usage of social media to psychiatrists, and condemns such action as a possible breach of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights. Children should not be used as “lab rats” nor should the government or any other public body force private companies to hand over such information. The house also condemns the ludicrous idea of these private companies paying a tax to fund the proposed research, as has been suggested.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 weeks ago
#2
I would think there are GDPR concerns too.

Do the TSR Tories not agree with this motion?
0
The Mogg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 weeks ago
#3
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
I would think there are GDPR concerns too.

Do the TSR Tories not agree with this motion?
I decided not to go through the party with this motion.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 weeks ago
#4
(Original post by The Mogg)
I decided not to go through the party with this motion.
Why? It's not like it's something that is time sensitive
0
The Mogg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 weeks ago
#5
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Why? It's not like it's something that is time sensitive
Because as I discovered with the Cardiff motion, there isn't really much benefit to going through the process of getting it seconded by the party with how it was whipped. Anyway, motions are more often than not sent by individuals so it's not like this is extraordinary.
0
LiberOfLondon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 weeks ago
#6
Aye.
To those complaining about MuH NeW MeDiA RuInInG ChIlDrEnZ LiVeZ, may I remind you of this quote:
”The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.” - Socrates, 400 BC.

Out of touch people have always complained about young people, and wrapping that up in nannyish concern about ”addiction” and whatever rubbish, Illiberal Antidemocrat, centrist, Guardian reading, elitist piffle you can dredge up does nothing to disguise it.
0
Paracosm
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 weeks ago
#7
Completely agreed, aye all the way
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 weeks ago
#8
(Original post by The Mogg)
Because as I discovered with the Cardiff motion, there isn't really much benefit to going through the process of getting it seconded by the party with how it was whipped. Anyway, motions are more often than not sent by individuals so it's not like this is extraordinary.
Are they more often than not sent by individuals though?

On the matter of the motion, these sorts of proposals are ultimately driven by people being unable to handle the fact that their child isn't the perfect little cherub they think they are. If a kid is violent it's not because they're a little **** that wasn't properly disciplined, it's because they watched violent films and played violent games, or it's the fault of the government; when somebody kills themselves it's not because they have something wrong with them that made them more suicidally inclined, it's the fault of the social media companies; when somebody is a rapist it's not because they are a sex pest, it's because of all the sex on TV.

People need to start taking more responsibility for themselves and stop blaming whatever the newest form of mass media is.
0
LiberOfLondon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Are they more often than not sent by individuals though?

On the matter of the motion, these sorts of proposals are ultimately driven by people being unable to handle the fact that their child isn't the perfect little cherub they think they are. If a kid is violent it's not because they're a little **** that wasn't properly disciplined, it's because they watched violent films and played violent games, or it's the fault of the government; when somebody kills themselves it's not because they have something wrong with them that made them more suicidally inclined, it's the fault of the social media companies; when somebody is a rapist it's not because they are a sex pest, it's because of all the sex on TV.

People need to start taking more responsibility for themselves and stop blaming whatever the newest form of mass media is.
The spirit of Mary Whitehouse lives on in the Labour Party.

Only now it's sugar, alcohol, energy drinks and any other nasty foods the lebbage enjoy.
0
quirky editor
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 weeks ago
#10
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
Why is a member of the government calling on his own government to do something when he admits he hasn't raised it internally? He is the SoS Education, surely has huge influence over the government's policy with children.
Who are you referring to? The Mogg is not part of our government.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by quirky editor)
Who are you referring to? The Mogg is not part of our government.
I thought there was a Tory government. Oops I guess I need to pay more attention
0
The Mogg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
Why is a member of the government calling on his own government to do something when he admits he hasn't raised it internally? He is the SoS Education, surely has huge influence over the government's policy with children.
Yes, someone with the name of The Mogg is part of a Labour-Liberal Democrat government.
1
The Mogg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Are they more often than not sent by individuals though?

On the matter of the motion, these sorts of proposals are ultimately driven by people being unable to handle the fact that their child isn't the perfect little cherub they think they are. If a kid is violent it's not because they're a little **** that wasn't properly disciplined, it's because they watched violent films and played violent games, or it's the fault of the government; when somebody kills themselves it's not because they have something wrong with them that made them more suicidally inclined, it's the fault of the social media companies; when somebody is a rapist it's not because they are a sex pest, it's because of all the sex on TV.

People need to start taking more responsibility for themselves and stop blaming whatever the newest form of mass media is.
Yes, yes they are. Looking at the Era 4 Motions Hansard, 25 out of 88 motions were sent by a party with the rest being individual(s) Or to go for a smaller range, in the last parliament out of 17 motions, 3 were party motions.

But on your comments on the matter, I completely agree.
0
quirky editor
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 weeks ago
#14
There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

This is not an absolute right.
Last edited by quirky editor; 4 weeks ago
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 weeks ago
#15
Data can be anonymised and on a scale such that an individual cannot be identified. If there was a strict set of rules around how this data is handled and GDPR and the ECHR is fully complied with, I would support it.
1
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
Aye.
To those complaining about MuH NeW MeDiA RuInInG ChIlDrEnZ LiVeZ, may I remind you of this quote:
”The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.” - Socrates, 400 BC.

Out of touch people have always complained about young people, and wrapping that up in nannyish concern about ”addiction” and whatever rubbish, Illiberal Antidemocrat, centrist, Guardian reading, elitist piffle you can dredge up does nothing to disguise it.
I think you're trying to conflate several different things here. The quote from Socrates describes children as being children. Every theory of childhood I've ever learnt has described a period of testing socially accepted rules and boundaries and producing behaviour which is rebellious to what they see as constraining them.

You've then identified a perspective of those who complain about young people, and another point of view where someone may be concerned about a child's use of technology "and whatever rubbish" with a string of adjectives that is classic of a stereotype you want to believe in. I'm not quite clear on whether you see these perspectives as the same or not, or indeed what the point in highlighting either of them was to illustrate your point.

This motion, as I read it, is about the responsibility (or lack thereof) of social media networks to the state for the protection of young people. If you wish to debate what is and isn't good for young people then I suppose you can do, but I'm not sure that's what this motion is focusing on.
1
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
On the matter of the motion, these sorts of proposals are ultimately driven by people being unable to handle the fact that their child isn't the perfect little cherub they think they are. If a kid is violent it's not because they're a little **** that wasn't properly disciplined, it's because they watched violent films and played violent games, or it's the fault of the government; when somebody kills themselves it's not because they have something wrong with them that made them more suicidally inclined, it's the fault of the social media companies; when somebody is a rapist it's not because they are a sex pest, it's because of all the sex on TV.

People need to start taking more responsibility for themselves and stop blaming whatever the newest form of mass media is.
All the academic research I've read says the opposite. I'd be happy to browse through some evidence supporting what you're suggesting if you wish to point me in the right direction.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by The Mogg)
Yes, yes they are. Looking at the Era 4 Motions Hansard, 25 out of 88 motions were sent by a party with the rest being individual(s) Or to go for a smaller range, in the last parliament out of 17 motions, 3 were party motions.

But on your comments on the matter, I completely agree.
The nature of the motions matters too, along with who writes them. If indies are writing then quite trivially they cannot be party, if time sensitive there is another reason for them not to be, if joke motions (as a great deal were, especially when Connor was churning out motions in a desperate attempt to get a better title) or otherwise motions to try to get votes and not for any particular purpose they are unlikely to be party
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by 04MR17)
All the academic research I've read says the opposite. I'd be happy to browse through some evidence supporting what you're suggesting if you wish to point me in the right direction.
100% of zero is zero, can we see this research?

We're talking about issues that have existed not just for the last decade, if you want to blame social media, nor the last half century if you want to blame video games, nor even the last century if you want to blame cinema and television, we're talking about things that have been true since the dawn of man.
0
The Mogg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
The nature of the motions matters too, along with who writes them. If indies are writing then quite trivially they cannot be party, if time sensitive there is another reason for them not to be, if joke motions (as a great deal were, especially when Connor was churning out motions in a desperate attempt to get a better title) or otherwise motions to try to get votes and not for any particular purpose they are unlikely to be party
Suppose, but it's done now anyway, nothing colossal will happen from this motion being submitted individually. Bottom line, I was just impatient and couldn't be bothered waiting for days for party approval.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (197)
67.93%
No (93)
32.07%

Watched Threads

View All