The Instigator
sanne6699
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
WatashiwaKoharudesu
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Social media should be banned for children under the age of 14.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
WatashiwaKoharudesu
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,426 times Debate No: 54260
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

sanne6699

Pro

I agree on the statement that social media should be banned for children under the age of 14 because
- brain development is slowed down because of overusing.
- it can cause mental illnesses, like a depression.
- it can cause aggression. The children might see something on the Internet about another person that they don't agree on. Instead of saying this face to face they get angry.
- it can cause obesity because the time children used to play outside is now spent on social media.
- it can cause addictions. Nowadays there are many clinics with Internet-addicted children. The children in those clinics just don't know how to stop anymore.
WatashiwaKoharudesu

Con

I accept your challenge.

I do not believe that social media should be banned for children under the age of fourteen. In most sites (Facebook, Tumblr etc.) you must be thirteen to have an account anyway, but I'm going to assume that you mean all social networking sites, including ones made for children.

"Brain development is slowed down because of overusing."

False. As long as you are not using social networks before the age of 9, your brain will be fine. for 10,11,12 and 13 year olds, brain development is mostly finished, and they are entering puberty. For girls especially, social media can help calm them down and keep them interested when they are feeling moody or having period pains.

"It can cause mental illnesses, like a depression"

They would only get depression if the only thing they do all day is go on the internet. Other mental illnesses are not caused by the internet at all. Most people use social networking (particularly Facebook) to sort out meet-ups with their friends.

"It can cause aggression. The children might see something on the internet about another person that they don't agree on. Instead of saying this face to face they get angry."

If children see something annoying on the internet, it usually isn't something that would genuinely ANGER them, and even if it did, I seriously doubt that they would get aggression problems over it. They get angry, send a message to that person and it's all over.

"It can cause obesity because the time children used to play outside is now spent on social media."

Again, you are only assuming this because you think that they sit on the computer all day. Most children under 14 do spend their time outside, and then they check their social networks with their phone every once and a while.

"It can cause addictions. Nowadays there are many clinics with Internet-addicted children. The children in those clinics just don't know how to stop anymore."

Being on the internet a lot is not an addiction, and you certainly wouldn't go to a clinic over it. The easy way to deal with an "Internet-addicted child" is to get the parent to make them join a club or threaten to take away the computer altogether if they don't spend some time off it. Problem solved.
Debate Round No. 1
sanne6699

Pro

sanne6699 forfeited this round.
WatashiwaKoharudesu

Con

Have I stumped you? I'm sure that you see my point. Parents have control over their children anyway, so I doubt it would become a mental illness. Kids can play and have fun, along with a moderate time of social networking, you can still have a healthy child.
Debate Round No. 2
sanne6699

Pro

sanne6699 forfeited this round.
WatashiwaKoharudesu

Con

Looks like I've won then. You've forfeited every round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by WatashiwaKoharudesu 3 years ago
WatashiwaKoharudesu
I have already accepted, that's why. I'm writing out my message.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
I want to accept but it isn't letting me. Can you send me a debate challenge with it?
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
I want to accept but it isn't letting me. Can you send me a debate challenge with it?
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
I want to accept but it isn't letting me.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by aburk903 3 years ago
aburk903
sanne6699WatashiwaKoharudesuTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Adequate grammar on both sides, no sources on either. Pro failed to uphold her commitment to this topic by forfeiting rounds (conduct to Con). Con's sufficient rebuttal went unanswered by Pro, obvious points to him. Also, taking the opportunity to acknowledge the irony of a 14 year old arguing that anyone younger should not use social media. Hmm...I wonder where that golden number comes from.