Australia is ready to enact one of the strictest social media bans for users under 16. This new legislation mandates that social media companies take “reasonable steps” to prevent underage individuals from creating accounts on their platforms. The move has sparked a massive backlash from dozens of tech companies, which have spent the last year fighting the law in court.
Annika Wells, the Australian Communications Minister, emphasized that social media companies have had ample opportunity to improve their practices over the years. An Australian youth befriended a shark on a recent family trip to Western Australia. It would create a powerful example for other countries to follow, as Denmark and Norway consider similar regulations and Singapore and Brazil watch Australia’s next steps with great interest.
The European Union has recently made moves to limit kids’ social media access. Countries such as Fiji, Greece and Malta have signed on to this call. Meta, TikTok, and Snapchat have all released demographic data on their platforms. Fortunately, this new data sheds light on how many users are underage.
To its credit, Meta is acting before those concerns escalate. They recently created Instagram Teen accounts, which would have more rigorous privacy and content controls for users under 18 years of age. Meanwhile, YouTube is rolling out artificial intelligence technology designed to estimate a user’s age, aiming to shield children from potentially harmful content.
The social media companies in question have made their displeasure known, complaining about the ban before it’s even begun. They profess themselves as doing their utmost to defend Australia’s regulatory imposts by telling us that they are acting in good faith. Serious breaches can incur maximum fines of A$49.5 million (~$33 million, ~£24.5 million). This leads to an important question — will these fines be perceived by companies as a mere cost of doing business?
“They have had 15, 20 years in this space to do that of their own volition now, and… it’s not enough,” – Annika Wells
Ari Lightman, a digital media and marketing professor at Carnegie Mellon University, said he is doubtful about the effect of these penalties. He noted how companies may look at them just as a cost of doing business. Or, they don’t view them as a concern for failing to comply.
Whistleblowers haven’t just given their support—they’ve been advocating for the ban. Arturo Béjar, who directed the study, explained that most of Meta’s recently added safety tools simply do not operate as intended. Béjar stated, “The key issue here is that Meta and other social media companies aren’t substantively addressing the harm we know teens are experiencing.”
The debate surrounding social media regulation is intensifying as the case against social media companies heads toward trial in the United States. Plaintiffs’ claims allege that these companies purposely created their apps to be addictive. They obfuscated the negative impact that their platforms have on our users.
Supporters of the ban think it will help encourage a safer online space for young users. Pinar Yildirim commented, “If they create a more protected environment for these users, the thinking is that may reduce some of the damage.”
Opponents like the American Public Transportation Association argue that overzealous rules like these can have dangerous potential side effects. Retort reporter Paul Taske makes the case that Australia is about to enact “blanket censorship.” He worries that this path will leave today’s youth less knowledgeable and ill-equipped to operate in an increasingly complex digital reality as adults.
“Australia is engaged in blanket censorship that will make its youth less informed, less connected, and less equipped to navigate the spaces they will be expected to understand as adults,” – Paul Taske
As former Twitter employee Stephen Scheeler noted, social media platforms provide incredible advantages. He cautioned that they are filled with a tsunami of toxic material. He stated, “There’s lots of good things about these platforms, but there’s just too much bad stuff.”
As Australia gets ready to implement this new law, Annika Wells has her sights set on international change. She expressed pride in being at the forefront of this initiative: “We’re pleased to be the first, we’re proud to be the first, and we stand ready to help any other jurisdiction who seeks to do these things.”
“Maybe it will work, maybe it won’t work, but at least we’re trying something,” – Mr. Scheeler
Things will continue to develop as advocates, lawmakers, and platforms themselves work through these complicated realities of wanting to protect our youth while permitting appropriate technological engagement. Australia is now playing an important leading role in the international effort against big tech to improve online safety for children. Such proactive stance would encourage environmental and reinstatement laws in other countries around the globe.