Australia set to become the first country to ban social media for users below age 16

Representational pic

The Australian Senate passed a bill on Thursday imposing a social media ban for children under the age of 16, and it will soon become a world-first law, news agenct AP reported.

The law will make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars (USD 33 million) for systemic failures to prevent children younger than 16 from holding accounts.

The Senate approved the bill with a 34-19 vote, following the overwhelming approval by the House of Representatives on Wednesday, which passed the legislation 102 votes to 13, AP reported. Although the House has yet to endorse amendments made in the Senate, this is seen as a formality as the government has already agreed to pass them.

The platforms will have one year to implement measures to enforce the ban before penalties are applied.

Meta Platforms, which owns Facebook and Instagram, expressed concerns, calling the legislation "rushed."

The amendments bolster privacy protections, prohibiting platforms from compelling users to provide government-issued identification, such as passports or driver's licences, or requiring digital identification via a government system. The House is scheduled to pass the amendments on Friday, AP reported.

Here's what critics of the bill say:

Some critics worry that banning children under 16 from social media could impact the privacy of users who will have to prove they are older than 16.

While major political parties in Australia support the ban, child welfare and mental health advocates have voiced concerns about potential unintended consequences.

Senator David Shoebridge from the minority Greens party said mental health experts agreed that the ban could isolate many children who use social media to find support.

"This policy will hurt vulnerable young people the most, especially in regional communities and especially the LGBTQI community, by cutting them off," Shoebridge told the Senate.

Opposition Senator Maria Kovacic argued that the bill was not radical but necessary. "The core focus of this legislation is simple: It demands that social media companies take reasonable steps to identify and remove underage users from their platforms," Kovacic stated.

"This is a responsibility these companies should have been fulfilling long ago, but for too long they have shirked these responsibilities in favour of profit," she added.

Parents of victims hail legislation

Online safety campaigner Sonya Ryan, whose 15-year-old daughter Carly was murdered by a 50-year-old pedophile who posed as a teenager online, hailed the Senate vote as a "monumental moment in protecting our children from horrendous harms online."

"It's too late for my daughter, Carly, and the many other children who have suffered terribly and those who have lost their lives in Australia, but let us stand together on their behalf and embrace this together," Ryan told the Associated Press in an email.

Wayne Holdsworth, whose teenage son Mac tragically took his own life after falling victim to an online sextortion scam, also expressed pride in the passage of the age restriction.

"I have always been a proud Australian, but for me, subsequent to today's Senate decision, I am bursting with pride," Holdsworth told the Associated Press in an email.

However, Christopher Stone, executive director of Suicide Prevention Australia, warned that the legislation failed to consider the positive role social media plays in supporting young people's mental health and sense of connection.

"The government is running blindfolded into a brick wall by rushing this legislation. Young Australians deserve evidence-based policies, not decisions made in haste," Stone stated.

The platforms have argued that the law will be unworkable and urged the Senate to delay the vote until June 2025, when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies will be completed, offering insights on how to exclude younger children.

"Naturally, we respect the laws decided by the Australian Parliament," said Meta Platforms, owner of Facebook and Instagram, in a statement. "However, we are concerned about the process which rushed the legislation through while failing to properly consider the evidence, what industry already does to ensure age-appropriate experiences, and the voices of young people."

Critics argue that the government is using the legislation to appeal to parents ahead of the general election due by May. They hope voters will reward the government for responding to concerns about children's addiction to social media. However, opponents contend that the legislation may cause more harm than good.

Among the criticisms are claims that the bill was rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, is ineffective, poses privacy risks for all users, and undermines parents' authority to make decisions for their children.

Opponents also argue that the ban will isolate children, deprive them of the positive aspects of social media, push them to the dark web, discourage children too young for social media from reporting harm, and reduce incentives for platforms to improve online safety.

(With AP inputs)