About 400,000 UK children supported by baby banks, up 11% on previous year
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jun/23/uk-children-baby-banks-povertyOpen linkView original on lemmy.worldhttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jun/23/uk-children-baby-banks-povertyOpen linkView original on lemmy.world
It is far better to protect them from social media than to protect them from poverty /s
Aren't we on this form of social media because we inherently disagree how larger forms (X, FB) are ran and who runs them?
I don't necessarily agree with the implementation, but I can definitely see why a reduction in people using those social media could be a net positive for the country.
Though no disagreement about a 11% increase being shocking, and thats despite lifting the two child benefit cap!
Seems like a reason to change how those larger forms run and who runs them then.
No algorithms, no dark patterns. No information systems, controlled by billionaires, with a vested interested in what information is shown to whom.
Or we can do nothing about the problems, and instead invade your privacy