What Is The Under-16 Social Media Ban REALLY About? | Trending Ep345

 The UK government are set to follow Australia in banning social media for Under-16s 'in the coming weeks'. They claim it's to protect the kids, but what is it REALLY about? Water companies urging Britons to only 'half fill' their paddling pools to save water, despite millions of gallons of water pumping through AI data centres and water companies losing millions of gallons from damaged pipework. Tony Blair is back from his holiday home on the Lake of fire, to warn Starmer and other Labour leadership hopefuls to 'get closer to Donald Trump'.

You can watch the full episode FOR FREE over on https://ickonic.com/Watch/3879

Link to our sponsor: https://tzla.club/

You can also subscribe to Ickonic to receive…

-  New Content Daily
-  Feature-Length Documentaries
-  Exclusive Original Series

Start your journey today for just £1.99 for the first month 

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:04

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to today's episode of Trending. You're gonna be sick of the sight of me eventually. Labour set to announce crackdown on social media for children within weeks. Here we go, folks. They've hardly kept it a secret, have they though, to be fair. Labour is expected to announce a social media crackdown within weeks, as the Prime Minister for now, Keir Starmer, on Tuesday said he would act very, very quickly. I'm wondering if he did that very, very quickly, despite splits between campaigners and child safety experts on what the new rules should be. Translation, it's the agenda, which is why it's happened in Australia, it's happened in New Zealand, it's happened across the EU in many different ways. So it's going to happen here, irrespective of what any campaigner or any child safety expert or whatever says, that's irrelevant. It's also not about child safety, by the way. Not that you need me to tell you that. That's just the sales pitch as usual. New limits on social media access for children could be presented before the Maker Field by election next month after an avalanche. Well, it's got to be dramatic. An avalanche of responses to a public consultation have been analyzed with the help of an AI system, you surprise me, called Consult, and an expert panel led by an eminent pediatrician. Eminent. Not just a normal pediatrician, eminent. The consultation closes on Tuesday. The consultation's a waste of time. It's nothing more than window dressing because they've already made their mind up. They know they have because other nations have done exactly the same thing and they're going to do it as well. That's how it works. That's democracy. They just go through the motions with this stuff. Also, with AI analysing it, AI is programmed. So AI can find what it's allowed to find. It will find the results it's meant to find from their point of view. So same as when people say, Grok, is this true? Well, Grok is limited on the sources in which it can get its information. So if I take out lots of alternative sources of information and say, right, this AI can only find information from these sources Associated Press, Reuters, the ADL, whatever, then you come to Grok and you go, Grok, is this true? Well, Grok's going to give you the answer based on what it's allowed to look at. And consult will be exactly the same. Age limits or changes to allegedly addictive design features or a um combination of both would then come into force before the end of the year and could affect a range of platforms, including Instagram, TikTok, uh, YouTube, gaming sites such as Roblox and messaging services such as Snapchat. Now, what this is, ladies and gentlemen, and we spoke about it before, of course, it's it's a it's a case of taking a real issue. Safety for kids online, the amount of weirdos and groomers and stuff out there, there is an addictive element to it with the dopamine hits and all this kind of stuff, and kids get they become zombified, right? So this so it's a legitimate problem. So what they do is they take a legitimate problem that any parent worth their salt would care about. When I was a kid, I mean, I got a bit of a stick, got a bit of stick as a k as a kid for various reasons. One, obviously, I was in a wheelchair for a bit, kids like laughing at that. Also, of course, you know, with my dad and the media and all that kind of vilification and stuff, took a bit of stick. But when I went home, that was the end of it. I mean, my sister gave me a bit of stick and all, but that was the end of it. Whereas now, kids go home, they're all online, they're on the phone, the bullying can continue 24 hours a day. It drives kids to to well, take their own lives in some severe cases. So it's a l there is an issue with it. I'm not sitting here claiming that there isn't, and there is a toxic element to online. And I I actually think it was designed that way, to be fair. I don't think it's a byproduct of of it. I think it was supposed to be like that. Well, it's certainly supposed to be highly addictive. That's the point. So people have a legitimate worry. The the government come in and go, right, don't worry, mate. You know how much we care about the kids. Don't you sort it, it'd be fine. Of course, that's not the real deal. Because one, they don't care about kids, and that's pretty obvious, you know, because it's not just Britain, it's across the world. The Epstein class in general is pushing through um all these kind of laws to restrict children's access to the internet, and we sort of know they don't care about kids. So it's not about that. A major part of it, in the UK at least, is about digital ID. Because if you need to access certain sites and you need to prove your age to access those sites, you will need to show a form of photo ID, of digital ID, to show that you're over age. Well, that doesn't just go for kids then, does it? Because the adults have got to show their overage as well. So then this will morph into just to protect the kids, just to protect the kids, it will morph into you will need to provide a form of digital ID to access social media. That's how it will start. Then that will evolve because there's dodgy sites out there, folks. That will evolve into you will need a form of digital ID to access the internet. So that's a huge part of it, of course. Another part of it, which we've touched on before, is the access to what kids can see. So I always use this as an example. COVID's a great example because I know people get bored, oh, it's going about COVID again. Well, yeah, because this was when, do you know what I mean? They stepped out of the shadows. It went from being a conspiracy theory, they'd never do that, to following arrows around Tesco's like a div and going on Facebook and whinging about Joan across the road if she didn't come out and clap at 8 p.m., right? The world went mad and it was visibly so. So it's a perfect example. Now, during COVID, the government, with their 5 p.m. briefings, next slide, please, and all that nonsense, was controlling what you saw, was controlling your reality and your perception of reality. Never mind what was going on around you. Watch the telly at 5 p.m., right? So they controlled that. And the media didn't even ask questions. They turned up at 5 p.m. and they broadcasted it. They didn't ask, no one put their hand up, went, well, actually, can you explain this? Because it doesn't make any sense. Didn't do that. All they did was broadcast it. So it became a propaganda arm, which of course it is anyway, but it became more obviously one. Then the social media companies went exactly down the exact same route. Everything you put up was the World Health Organization says, they controlled everything in terms of what you could see on social media. So then what happened is all these people were getting banned from social media. Other platforms, I mean, a lot of information got out on social media, don't get me wrong, but a lot didn't. Other platforms started popping up, other video um channels, ourselves, to be fair, iconic, started putting stuff out there. And so these kids had access to information, particularly pertaining to the jabs, that they wouldn't have had. They certainly wouldn't have had on social media. I'm sorry, they certainly wouldn't have had on the mainstream media. Um, sorry. They certainly wouldn't have got from school because the national curriculum and everyone follows the guidelines and all that kind of stuff. They got a bit of it from social media, quite a bit to be fair, from social media, but obviously it was heavily censored and a lot of these accounts were banned and vilified, and there were notes underneath each one saying these guys are lying, whatever, misinformation, disinformation. So then there was the alternative sites that were getting information out there. Well, they won't have access to them either with this. So next time they pull it, remember Bill Gates, Kermit of the Frog will get attention next time and all that stuff. Suddenly you take out that element, you take out that source of information because you we banned from it. So how kids so suddenly kids get their information from the tele, lies, the teacher, overwhelmingly lies, or state-approved social media. Well, best of luck with that. That's what it's really about. Okay. UK households, so this is funny, right?

SPEAKER_02 8:37

Can I get uh two latte, please? One DCA.

SPEAKER_01 8:43

Thank you. I've just seen the most horrendous news on the upstream finders. No, I actually wish I couldn't see it. So then, how about it's from a conspiracy realmist?

SPEAKER_02 9:13

Well, first thing is you're gonna unsubscribe from all your mainstream platforms or ITV, VPC, in it. Then you're gonna subscribe to the only platform actually free.

SPEAKER_01 9:24

Great. Really a man.