A cross-party bill proposes to go further than banning social media for minors. It aims to ban nothing less than the sale of smartphones to those under 15. An initiative that has its arguments but which raises questions about its practical effectiveness.
Socialist MP Ayda Hadizadeh and her right-wing colleague Jérémie Patrier-Leitus (Horizons) are preparing to submit a bill aimed at banning the sale of smartphones to those under 15. A measure which, if it were actually passed, raises questions about its potential effectiveness, beyond the symbolic.
Indeed, in general, it is never the child who buys a smartphone themselves, but rather their parents. This should therefore not change much for the people targeted by the text. By introducing this Law, the deputies of a very divided assembly are expressing their intention to go further in the protection of minors.
Was a Law against the sale of smartphones to children under 15 really necessary?
The government is currently working on a ban on social networks for children under 15. The text is thus seen as a support, certainly symbolic, but which could potentially (they no doubt hope) reinforce its effects. Jérémie Patrier-Leitus, quoted by our colleagues at Le Figaro, explains his motivations:
"The smartphone is a time bomb, a weapon of mass destruction for the bond between children and their parents, for attention, sleep, and self-esteem. Putting it in the hands of our children is unacceptable, as if we were giving them a glass of wine or a cigarette," explains the elected official.
We can, of course, remain circumspect about the interest of such a text. The real problem to be addressed lies more with the parents than with the children themselves. The fact remains that the text must, of course, in addition to being officially submitted, still be examined by both chambers, amended, and voted on.
Which is not yet a done deal. Beyond the legislative pile-up, we wonder, more broadly, whether opting for ever more bans is necessarily the way forward. In any case, rather than an approach focused more on accountability. Because on this score, there is no doubt that the proposed law constitutes a dismal false start: why not instead directly attack those truly responsible, that is, the parents?
0 Comments