Reader debate

Guidelines from above: When do they make sense?

(Bild: EXPA Pictures. Alle Rechte vorbehalten. // EXPA Pictures. All rigths reserved.)

The krone.at forum is a place of daily discussion and debate. In our new "Readers' debate" section, we want to highlight special comments and ask the community for their opinion on an exciting aspect. Today it's about laws to protect young people online, especially the question of whether top-down decisions in politics are sometimes necessary.

A new law in Australia aims to ban social media for young people under the age of 16. "Krone reader REAL-IST commented critically that he believes the Australian government is acting too authoritarian and making many decisions top-down. He finds it worrying that the government is making decisions in areas such as smoking and now social media without the direct involvement of citizens.

"Top-down" vs. "bottom-up"
 But what exactly does "top-down" mean? In a top-down approach, the government makes decisions centrally and implements them directly, without giving citizens a direct say. In contrast, in a bottom-up approach, the views of the population are given greater consideration in the decision-making process.

In this case, what do you think of the top-down decision to only allow Facebook, TikTok and co. from the age of 16? Do you think that parents and young people need to have a greater say here in order to find a more balanced solution? What do you think about top-down decisions in general? Are there situations in which they are necessary? Share your opinion on the topic with us in the comments!