CreateDebate


Debate Info

7
7
For Against
Debate Score:14
Arguments:15
Total Votes:14
Ended:04/04/12
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 For (6)
 
 Against (7)

Debate Creator

Irina(32) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Should children be allowed to use social networks?

For

Side Score: 7
Winning Side!
VS.

Against

Side Score: 7
2 points

Despite not using them myself (unless you class CD as a social network, which I don't), I don't see a problem with it. Besides, it's always funny to hear people argue in class about Facebook, then go home and argue about the class, ON FACEBOOK!

I mean, who doesn't feel slightly superior when people do this?

| Side: For
Coldfire(984) Clarified
1 point

It's not comparable to the ridiculousness of Facebook, but CD is still an online network where people socialize.

I don't blame you for not using Facebook, it's a sorry example.

| Side: For
1 point

If they are responsible with them then yes, I don't see why not. However if they are not sensible then that one child should be permanently banned. The same rules should apply to adults as well. Social networks enable children in the modern day to excel further in ICT, and this understanding can be a huge advantage in this technical world.

| Side: For
1 point

The newer generations have always had a head start with the already existing technology. With our community ensuring that children are well informed about the risks involved, and with children becoming more adept at technology than we were at their age, they will be better equipped to handle dangerous situations earlier on in life.

Sheltering children doesn’t make danger magically go away; knowledge can help teach a child how to protect themselves though.

| Side: For
1 point

Well I think in my opinion children shouldn't use social networks because someone talk to them and they could get easily bullied online and if the person keeps talking to the child they could hurt there feelings. I would wait until the children is a teenager when they are mature and know how to defend themselves when they talk. They can meet friends at school where they know people instead of meeting someone online who you don't who they are behind the computer and could lie about there age. So I would play it safe and wait. Even I don't have a facebook or any type of social network and I am totally fine.

| Side: Against
1 point

Well I think in my opinion children shouldn't use social networks because someone talk to them and they could get easily bullied online and if the person keeps talking to the child they could hurt there feelings. I would wait until the children is a teenager when they are mature and know how to defend themselves when they talk. They can meet friends at school where they know people instead of meeting someone online who you don't who they are behind the computer and could lie about there age. So I would play it safe and wait.

| Side: Against
Coldfire(984) Clarified
1 point

Did you just copy srom's post?...

...or is this just srom on a different account?

That might explain why you get 'up-voted' on ridiculous arguments

| Side: For
1 point

In my opinion, children should not use social networks. First of all it waste their time, secondly, there are a lot of information in social networks that children at their age should`t know, thirdly, there are nothing useful in social networks. Children should use Internet, but not social networks. There are a lot of developing games, films and etc. For what children should use social networks? Moreover, using social networks will lead to the addiction from Internet from childhood. Child should have the real childhood and this time must be continued as long as possible.

| Side: Against
Coldfire(984) Disputed
1 point

First of all it waste their time.

While I agree that children can use their time more productively, society doesn’t really give them too much responsibility. Many kids don’t have a job or take care of kids or need to pay bills, so they do have plenty of free time to waste.

Besides, I don’t think you really provided a very convincing argument that it really is a waste of time.

secondly, there are a lot of information in social networks that children at their age should`t know

Knowledge is power. As long as we teach our children critical thinking skills early on, they can weed out the pseudo-reasoning and rhetoric in the media. I don’t think children should ever be withheld from learning new information.

Perhaps you can give an example of what you mean.

thirdly, there are nothing useful in social networks.

Social networks provide a venue for people of all ages, nationalities, and backgrounds to gather in discussion. I admit that there are those that engage in meaningless drama and gossip, but the more I see the dialog in social networks, the more I see a trend growing where people actually use their brain and challenge things they read. People on a wide scale are starting to use critical thinking on many things and when I see a kid make a smart comment, it puts a smile on my face and gives me a little ray of hope that our species might actually survive this time of perils.

Children should use Internet, but not social networks.

That’s somewhat like saying children should use the libraries, but not join study groups.

using social networks will lead to the addiction from Internet from childhood.

Not everyone who eats will develop an eating addiction. Not everyone who drinks alcohol will develop an alcohol addiction. Not everyone who uses the internet will develop an internet addiction.

Things (most things anyway) are not addictive in themselves. It’s that people are susceptible to addiction and thus have addictive personalities. This may not be entirely in their control, and may have been caused by some outside force early in life, but a thing is not addictive.

| Side: For
1 point

I think that parents should control and protect their children from on line threats. For example, on the 6 of February Ministry of Israel called parents to prohibit to children under the age of 13 years old using of social networks.

| Side: Against

It doesn't matter if they use them to play the appropriate games but the other stuff that comes with it no.

| Side: Against
1 point

There are a lot of threats that child can meet in Internet, especially in social networks. The first is social aggression. It is the biggest danger. For instance, cyber-intimidation.The second is wasting time. The third is risk of communications with adults.According to the research that has been carried out in 2005 year, one of seven child fights with objectionable sexual harassment.

| Side: Against
Coldfire(984) Disputed
1 point

There are a lot of threats that child can meet in Internet

There are a lot of threats that can happen to a child in real life. There are a lot of threats that can happen to anyone on the internet or in real life.

The first is social aggression. It is the biggest danger. The first is social aggression. It is the biggest danger. For instance, cyber-intimidation.

Bullying happens in school as well, has been happening far longer than it has on the internet and yet we still send our kids to schools.

If anyone should be banned from social networks, it’s the bully. The victim didn’t do anything wrong.

The second is wasting time.

How so?

The third is risk of communications with adults.

Wow, so every adult now is a danger to our children on the internet?

According to the research that has been carried out in 2005 year, one of seven child fights with objectionable sexual harassment.

Can you cite your source?

And again, why restrict the victims liberty when they are not the one who committed the crime?

As I’ve stated in another post: sheltering children from the world’s problems doesn’t make those problems magically disappear, however; informing them and preparing them can have a drastic affect on a child’s susceptibility to dangers in life. With the proper knowledge, children can determine for themselves whether or not something is a threat and how to defend themselves if need be.

| Side: For
1 point

Parents should understand that social networks are very dangerous for children. Because it contain a big amount of information. Could you imagine, what kind of person child will be, if he or she from the age of 8-9 years old watch porno, listen to obscene songs? I am sure that level of this child will differ from the intellectual level of child who instead of using social networks read books and draw.

| Side: Against
Coldfire(984) Disputed
1 point

Parents should understand that social networks are very dangerous for children. Because it contain a big amount of information.

Right, we wouldn’t want our children getting too smart now. /sarcasm

Could you imagine, what kind of person child will be, if he or she from the age of 8-9 years old watch porno, listen to obscene songs?

I’d rather not. But I can’t remember ever seeing pornography on any social network that didn’t require some age verification. And there are parental controls, not just on the internet, but over the entire computer which prevent children from accessing those things.

Besides, I don’t know any 8-9 year olds that would actually be interested enough to pursue such things on the internet, it wouldn’t even occur to them.

I am sure that level of this child will differ from the intellectual level of child who instead of using social networks read books and draw.

It all depends on the content, if a child reads the Buybull or draws naked girls, then they may not develop as favorably as one might hope. Just like if people use Facebook instead of Createdebate, they may not develop favorably.

| Side: For


About CreateDebate
The CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Help/FAQ
Newsletter Archive
Sharing Tools
Invite Your Friends
Bookmarklets
Partner Buttons
RSS & XML Feeds
Reach Out
Advertise
Contact Us
Report Abuse
Twitter
Basic Stuff
User Agreement
Privacy Policy
Sitemap
Creative Commons
©2014 TidyLife, Inc. All Rights Reserved. User content, unless source quoted, licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Debate Forum | Big shout-outs to The Bloggess and Andy Cohen.