Lords back social media ban for under-16s, before asking what social media ‘is’

The House of Lords has voted to back a move to ban under-16s from social media platforms, despite the apparent fact that many peers remain unclear on what social media actually is, or indeed whether it requires a stamp.

Opening the debate, several lords warned darkly of the dangers facing children exposed to ‘constant online interaction’, a phrase one peer later clarified meant “receiving more than one message per week, not delivered via the Royal Mail, and without sealing wax”.

Baroness Tregaron of Little Wittering expressed concern that social media encourages “oversharing”, citing an alarming trend in which young people “announce their feelings publicly, rather than bottling them up until death, as God intended”.

Another warned that “young people today are addicted to posting”, a term he later explained referred to “the dangerous habit of pinning handwritten notes to the village noticeboard without proper adult supervision”.

Baroness Fitz-Glynn warned of the addictive nature of ‘likes’, which she described as “those ghastly little affirmations people now crave, instead of learning to live with nothing more than a stern nod from a disappointed father.”

“I have no objection to communication,” said one lord, born during the reign of George V, “but when messages can be sent instantly rather than by telegram, something has clearly gone too far.”

Several peers appeared to conflate social media with the society pages of national newspapers, recalling a more innocent time when reputations were destroyed slowly, in print, and only after editorial approval.

“In my youth,” said Lord Haversham (92), “if one wished to humiliate oneself publicly, it required an affair, a photographer, and at least two editions of The Times.”

Several members appeared to believe social media was operated manually, expressing hope that the ban would be enforced by ‘the chaps at the internet’ checking birth certificates before allowing messages to be sent.

The proposed ban, supporters say, will safeguard children from harmful content, online pressure, and the unregulated exchange of opinions – something the House of Lords has long believed should only be done by elderly people in robes, at length, and ideally before lunch.

While united in their determination to regulate the digital future, members of the House of Lords remain quietly hopeful that someone will eventually explain to them what an ‘app’ is, and why it cannot be folded, posted, or delivered by a trusted servant named Perkins.

Advertisement

WANT TO GET RIDOF ALL THE ADS?

Support topical satire for the price of one coffee month!

SUBSCRIBE HERE →