📵🤖 Debate Night #2 - should kids under 16 be banned from social media and AI?

📵🤖 Debate Night - should kids under 16 be banned from social media and AI chatbots?
Structured debate night - prepared discussion, not a casual hot-take circle.

Main motion
Kids under 16 should be banned from social media and AI companion chatbots.

Short summary
This is one of those topics where everyone thinks they already know what they believe.
“Protect the kids.”
“Parents should decide.”
“Government overreach.”
“Tech companies are the problem.”
“Kids will just find a way around it.”
“AI companions are different from Instagram.”
“Actually, they’re worse.”
Good. That means we have a room.
This debate is not just about TikTok or phones. It’s about childhood, attention, loneliness, parenting, freedom, tech company responsibility, and whether we trust teenagers - or the adults and platforms surrounding them - to handle systems designed to keep people hooked.
Australia has already moved toward an under-16 social media restriction, and AI companion chatbots are becoming part of teen life faster than most adults understand. So this is not a futuristic debate. It is already here.
This will be a prepared debate, not a rant night.
Please watch the two short videos before coming.

Required prep - watch these 2 videos
1. BBC - “Will Australia’s social media ban for under-16s work?”
This gives us the real-world case: what an actual under-16 social media ban might look like, and why it might work or fail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FNIAzYLCQA
2. CBS News - “Inside the debate over teens using AI companions for support”
This brings in the AI chatbot / companion side, so we’re not only debating Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat.
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/inside-the-debate-over-teens-using-ai-companions-for-support/

Come ready to answer this
Is this mainly about child safety, parenting, government overreach, or tech company responsibility?
The three fights we’re having
1. Harm
Are social media and AI chatbots seriously harming kids?
Not “are they sometimes bad?” That’s too easy.
The real question is: are they harmful enough that society should step in before age 16?
2. Freedom
Who should decide?
Parents?
Kids?
Schools?
Government?
Tech companies?
Or is that the wrong question because the platforms are designed to overpower individual choice?
3. Enforcement
Would a ban actually work?
Can age verification be done without creating privacy problems?
Would kids just route around it?
Would bans push them into weirder, less visible corners of the internet?
Or is “it won’t be perfect” a weak excuse for doing nothing?
How the room works
We’ll start with a quick vote:
Yes / No / Undecided
Then people sit by their current lean:
- left side = yes / lean yes
- right side = no / lean no
- middle / end seats = undecided / mixed
You can switch sides later if your view changes.
That is not losing. That is the whole point.

The rough structure
- quick arrivals / settle in
- opening vote
- Round 1: Harm
- Round 2: Freedom
- Round 3: Enforcement
- final vote + what changed
- optional social after

Rules of the room
Attack arguments, not people.
Keep comments short enough that the room stays alive.
No interrupting.
No dunking.
No sarcasm-as-substitute-for-thinking.
Respond to the strongest version of the other side.
Make room for quieter people.
Changing your mind is a good outcome.

When and where
📅 Sunday, June 7, 2026
🕒 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM
📍 Central Library - Room will be announced on day of

Cap 12–15 + waitlist
Debate gets worse when the room gets too big and people start performing.
Small room, better arguments.
Small note
If you did not watch the prep videos, you can still come - but expect to listen more at first.
The best version of this night is people arguing from examples, not just vibes.