Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

Won't someone think of the government?

We've seen a massive move, in many countries, to roll out age-gating of social media.

This has all been done under the Trojan horse banner of "think of the children".

Those of us with half a brain realise that this has a lot less to do with protecting vulnerable children than it does with forcing digital ID on the wider population and the tracking/surveilance that such a move allows.

Across the ditch in Australia we've already seen mandatory age-gating for social media and, in theory, under 16-year-olds are no longer allowed to access the websites and apps they love so much, without significant restrictions.

In reality, most under-16's are still using social media despite the Australian government's best attempts to stop them.

What's more, even the Australian eSafety commission reports (as of March 2026) that "Children aged under 16 continue to report harm to eSafety – there has not been a discernible drop in overall numbers" (see page 8 of that report).

So, from a child-safety perspective, the initative has been a fail, as we knew it would be.

Of course politicians aren't listening to the protests of the public, not even those well-informed members of the public who understand how futile the whole concept is. They're not listening because the agenda is not to protect children, it's to force everyone to hand over uniquely identifying information such as face-scans, drivers licenses, passports or whatever is deemed necessary to allow for more effective monitoring of online activity right down to an individual level.

Now, in the UK, they're even talking about forcing social media companies to block "explicit images" on childrens phones and other devices.

Once again this will be an exercise in futility -- which is exactly what the government already knows it to be.

So why roll out such a draconian restriction if they know it's not going to work?

That's pretty simple... because they know that when it fails they can once again roll out the Trojan horse approach of "well everyone needs to identify themselves instead, if we are to protect the children from this harmful material".

Those who object to such an imposition and stripping away of privacy will be accused of being pro-child-abuse. This is the ultimate coercion, designed to force people into swallowing impositions that would otherwise be totally unacceptable.

Call me cynical -- but these are strategies I've seen many times before and I have no doubt I will see used many times again.

Once other governments across the Western world see just how much power these ID verification laws give them, those currently holding out will inevitably give in and introduce the same laws themselves. After all, who in power wouldn't enjoy the benefits of being able to identify, track and monitor those who oppose you and seek to have you ousted at the ballot box?

In the third decade of the 21st century we live in a world that is far removed from the comparatively idyllic one in which I spent my formative years. A period when privacy and the right to anonymity were protected freedoms enjoyed by every man, woman and child; a time when the right to be presumed innocent was enshrined in law and when paranoia was a mental health condition, not standard operating practice for governments and authorities.

Ah well, at least we have the memories -- until we're sent to room 101 at The Ministry of Love.

Carpe Diem folks!

Please visit the sponsor!

Here is a PERMANENT link to this column

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font