Australian Senate approves social media ban on under-16s

Australia has taken a significant step by approving a law that will prevent children under the age of 16 from using social media. This decision was made by the Australian Senate, which has now established the strictest regulations in the world regarding social media access for young individuals. The law is set to be enforced in at least 12 months, and if technology companies fail to comply, they could face hefty fines of up to A$50 million, which is equivalent to about $32. 5 million or £25. 7 million. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has emphasized the necessity of this legislation, stating that it is crucial for safeguarding young people from the potential dangers associated with social media platforms. Many parent groups have echoed his sentiments, expressing their concerns about the impact of social media on their children. However, there are critics who argue that the details surrounding the implementation of this ban remain unclear, particularly regarding its implications for privacy and social connections. This is not the first time that a country has attempted to limit children's access to social media, but Australia is setting a precedent with the highest age limit imposed by any nation. Notably, the law does not provide exemptions for existing users or those who have parental consent. Albanese remarked, 'This is a global problem and we want young Australians essentially to have a childhood. ' He aims to provide parents with peace of mind regarding their children's online activities. The Senate passed the bill with a vote of 34 in favor and 19 against late on Thursday. The bill will now return to the House of Representatives, where the government holds a majority, ensuring its approval of any amendments before it becomes law. The legislation does not specify which social media platforms will be banned; those decisions will be made later by Australia’s communications minister, who will consult with the eSafety Commissioner, the body responsible for enforcing these new rules. Notably, gaming and messaging platforms will be exempt from the ban, as will websites that can be accessed without an account, meaning that popular sites like YouTube are likely to remain available to users. The government plans to rely on some form of age-verification technology to enforce the restrictions, and various options will be tested in the coming months. It will be the responsibility of social media platforms to implement these age-checking processes. However, digital researchers have raised concerns about the effectiveness of the unspecified technology, which may rely on biometric data or identity information. Critics have also called for assurances that privacy will be maintained throughout this process. They have warned that children could easily bypass the restrictions using tools like VPNs, which can mask a user's location and make it appear as though they are accessing the internet from another country. Importantly, children who manage to circumvent the rules will not face any penalties. Polling data, although limited, indicates that a majority of Australian parents and caregivers support these reforms. Amy Friedlander, a parent who has been advocating for the ban, stated, 'For too long parents have had this impossible choice between giving in and getting their child an addictive device or seeing their child isolated and feeling left out. ' However, many experts argue that the ban is too blunt an instrument to effectively address the risks associated with social media use. They caution that it could inadvertently push children into less regulated areas of the internet. During a brief consultation period before the bill was passed, major tech companies like Google and Snap criticized the legislation for its lack of detail. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, claimed that the bill would be 'ineffective' and would not achieve its goal of making children safer online. TikTok expressed concerns that the government's definition of a social media platform was so broad and unclear that 'almost every online service could fall within [it]. ' The platform X questioned the 'lawfulness' of the bill, suggesting that it may not align with international regulations and human rights treaties that Australia has signed. Some youth advocates have accused the government of not fully understanding the role that social media plays in the lives of young people and of excluding them from the discussion. The eSafety Youth Council, which advises the eSafety Commissioner, stated, 'We understand we are vulnerable to the risks and negative impacts of social media… but we need to be involved in developing solutions. ' Albanese has acknowledged that the debate surrounding this issue is complex but has firmly defended the bill. He stated, 'We all know technology moves fast and some people will try to find ways around these new laws, but that is not a reason to ignore the responsibility that we have. ' Last year, France introduced legislation to block social media access for children under 15 without parental consent, although research indicates that nearly half of users were able to bypass the ban using VPNs. In the United States, a similar law in Utah was overturned by a federal judge who deemed it unconstitutional. Australia's new laws are being closely monitored by global leaders, with Norway recently pledging to follow in Australia's footsteps. Additionally, the UK's technology secretary mentioned that a similar ban is 'on the table,' although he later clarified that it is not being considered at the moment.