3 ms·
> The internet was never a danger to children’s mental health until social media engagement algorithms. I suspect that depends on subtle phrasing. If for the
by ben_w 4mo ago
> The internet was never a danger to children’s mental health until social media engagement algorithms.
I suspect that depends on subtle phrasing.
If for the sake of argument I presuppose that film classification ratings are necessary to protect children’s mental health, then the un-filtered contents of shock sites and porn sites will have had an impact even in the early years of the internet.
However, the early years of the internet simply had a much smaller proportion of kids online to experience this.
- tosti 4mo agoI don't think the distinction matters that much. Remember ogrish? I was already an adult when that gore came out and I was terrified. I can still picture the throat gasping for air as he was being sliced alive.
- ben_w 4mo ago> Remember ogrish? No*, however the point is valid: the internet overall is indeed unfiltered far beyond what is allowed in even the highest cinematic ratings. * I avoided such things, however I do know the low end of what they can be, and had in mind 2girls1cup which I understand to be criminal "extreme porn" by UK standards, though have never actually seen it.
- tosti 4mo agoYes, especially back then. But I don't think age-gating is useful for gore. Even if I had dementia I'd be horrified. Just with the benefit of not being able to remember it.