Schlagwörter
Aktuelle Nachrichten
America
Aus Aller Welt
Breaking News
Canada
DE
Deutsch
Deutschsprechenden
Global News
Internationale Nachrichten aus aller Welt
Japan
Japan News
Kanada
Karte
Karten
Konflikt
Korea
Krieg in der Ukraine
Latest news
Map
Maps
Nachrichten
News
News Japan
Polen
Russischer Überfall auf die Ukraine seit 2022
Science
South Korea
Ukraine
Ukraine War Video Report
UkraineWarVideoReport
United Kingdom
United States
United States of America
US
USA
USA Politics
Vereinigte Königreich Großbritannien und Nordirland
Vereinigtes Königreich
Welt
Welt-Nachrichten
Weltnachrichten
Wissenschaft
World
World News
11 Kommentare
Saved you click:
A boy killed a litter of puppies after a friend showed him videos of animal cruelty on social media at school, MPs were told yesterday.
The child endured ’severe nightmares‘ in the days following the attack at home after being shown the clip on a smartphone, according to an online safety campaigner.
Health Professionals for Safer Screens founder Dr Rebecca Foljambe warned of a rise in pupils watching online videos of violence against other children and animals.
Dr Foljambe told a Parliamentary committee: ‚We had a recent case of a child who watched animal cruelty on a smartphone from a child who showed him at school and went home and killed a litter of puppies and came to us with severe nightmares.‘
‚He had watched a video of how to do that on social media at school. What we see in practice is valid evidence of the harm children are coming to on these platforms. We believe this harm is increasing, day by day, week by week, year on year.‘
She also blamed social media for a drop in the use of hormonal contraceptives because of false claims that the pill leads to weight gain, infertility and brain tumours.
As first reported by the Telegraph, Dr Foljambe said: ‚This is really damaging for young women. Our teenage pregnancies are back on the rise and we have the highest-ever rate of abortion in young women at the moment.‘
She was one of eight experts speaking to the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee as it looks into whether social media should be banned under 16s.
Frank Young, chief executive of the charity Parentkind, told MPs that one in five 16 to 18-year-olds said social media had ‚made them feel like life was not worth living‘.
He added that a third were receiving sexual imagery or messages from strangers, and a similar number were receiving extremely violent or gory images regularly.
It follows a ban on social media for under-16s being rejected by MPs on Monday, after the age limit had been backed by peers following growing calls from campaigners.
Supporters of the Australian-style ban have said parents are in ‚an impossible position‘ over the online harms children are being exposed to. Others, including the NSPCC, warn a ban could drive teenagers into unregulated corners of the internet.
MPs voted 307 to 173, majority 134, against the proposed change to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, brought forward by Tory former minister Lord Nash.
However, a ban could still come in future after the Commons supported a Government bid to give additional powers to the Secretary of State.
Under the amendment in lieu, Science Secretary Liz Kendall could ‚restrict or ban children of certain ages from accessing social media services and chat bots‘.
She could also limit children’s VPN use, restrict access to addictive features, and change the age of digital consent in the UK, education minister Olivia Bailey told MPs.
Oh how convenient. Imagine believing this propaganda.
a few things don’t add up here, I think this is just a straight up lie.
* if he was traumatised by the act, why carry it out?
* if not traumatised, why do it, just because he was shown how?
* how does a child, or under 16 year old, obtain a whole litter of puppies without alerting anyone, or being a cause for concern
* did anything happen to this evil little git?
* where did Rebecca Foljambe, the founder of the non-profit Health Professionals for Safer Screens, find this story, as I can’t seem to find any mention of this under a variety of these words
it seems like this is just a lie that was touted to the house of lords and that gives publications carte blanche to report on it as fact – beause someone reputable said in a place with authority.
So traumatised that he went home after watching the video and murdered puppies. That doesn’t add up, at all. Smells like a stupid kid, possibly a psychopath (Well, you’d have to be really) making an excuse up to deflect blame from himself.
Instances like this will also be used to impose more strict OSA legislation, which I suspect was partially the aim as well as to ban social media for under 16s. Even if you do ban it, the kids will circumvent it, just like they did in Australia.
Serial killer in the making. He needs to watched for the rest of his life.
If only they cared about children in real life as much as this supposed „care“ by removing massive rights and freedoms for everyone
How many trafficked and refugee kids come here, are lost by the home office, and likely in some form of slavery or prostitution? https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/nov/24/trafficked-children-lone-child-asylum-seekers-missing-councils-care-uk
How about the Rochdale kids failed for years by incompetence and cover ups and worse.
They literally don’t care about these kids. Or kids online. This is about something very different I think, hence the amount of attention it is getting in pushing it through globally.
If all it takes is a video „tutorial“ on killing something to cause someone to kill something, then they’re probably going to just go ahead and kill something eventually – tutorial or not.
Downvoted for posting a Daily Heil link without warning.
I’ve never read something that I am convinced is a blatant lie more than this.
The amount of utter *nonsense* that has to occur for such a scenario to even happen is insane. What do you mean he was „traumatized“ and then went and did it anyway? Why the fuck are they lying lmao
It’s like these endless articles about „suicide forums“. I have used the Internet for over 20 years, since I was 11 years old, and I NEVER not ONCE saw ANYTHING even remotely similar to a „suicide forum“ for example.
I just don’t believe this happened at all, and it’s being used as an agenda to keep censoring the internet.
Oh we better just ban all the things then…
Why do they always just accept complete bullshit?
There was a motion in Parliament after James Bulger was murdered, it starts –
„That this House notes that a child in the United States of America is likely to have seen 20,000 murders on television by the age of five; further notes that many homes in the United Kingdom are increasingly saturated by a growing culture of violence disseminated by television, video and computer, and that the father of one of the boys found guilty of the murder of James Bulger brought into his home videos, allegedly including the film, Child Play III which depicts a doll that turns into a child and which is subsequently killed by two boys on a ghost-train“
This led to greater restrictions on home video tape sales, a number of films being reclassified and others effectively banned.
A 5 year old child would have had to see a *depiction* of murder 11 times a day from the moment they’re born to get to 20k.
The Child’s Play III story was entirely fabricated by the press, so that section is literally just – the father of one of the murderers owned a video recorder.
(More than 80% of homes had a video recorder in 1993)
A rehash of the Adam Britain story is meant to shock you into voting. If you’re easily disturbed, I suggest you don’t Google it. I won’t describe it in detail, but let me warn you: if this story is true, then God help us all. I’m not religious, but if there’s even a slight chance that another Adam Britain could exist, we should all be very concerned.