Comment by burkaman
1 day ago
Reading the polling questions, it doesn't actually seem that contradictory.
> To what extent do you support or oppose the introduction of age verification checks to access platforms that may host content related to suicide, self-harm, eating disorders and pornography?
Most people say support, presumably thinking "yeah those things seem bad and kids shouldn't be able to look at them".
> How likely or unlikely would you be to submit any proof of age (e.g. a photo/ video, photographic ID, using banking information, digital ID wallets etc) in order to access... Messaging apps / Social media websites / Online discussion forums / User-generated encyclopedias / Dating apps / Pornography websites
"Ok no I don't like this method, and obviously I'm not going to submit a photo of myself to look at porn." I don't think anybody hearing the first question was thinking "yes I support age verification even if it means blocking Wikipedia".
> And how confident, if at all, are you that the Online Safety Act will prevent children and people under 18 from seeing illegal and harmful material online?
Nothing contradictory about supporting a policy that you don't think will completely work, especially after realizing that you yourself would probably try to get around it.
I think combining or switching the first two questions might produce very different results.
It's all very "how to lie with statistics".
The world is complicated, and normal to have conflicting ideas.
To an extent, but it's also priming, ie lying with statistics.
Obviously if you tell people you're doing something to protect children and that's its only for porn or whatever they'll say yes. You've primed them - you immediately put their minds on the focus of negative things like porn and children getting hurt. Nobody wants children hurt.
You need to ask the question more generically. "Do you support age verification to access certain categories of websites?"
Something tells me the numbers of agreeance will fall.