Last week, Federal Parliament passed the much-anticipated under-16s Social Media Ban in a world-first, drawing interest, praise and consternation from local and global audiences.
While the bill doesn’t describe exactly how it will be enforced, the government has ruled out forcing users to submit government-issued identity documents, which can only be used as proof of identify if alternate methods are also available.
The government will conduct age-verification trials to examine how a combination of activity tracking, biometrics, age estimation software and parental verification could be most effectively implemented, with a report due in June next year.
The response has been eclectic, with some foreign governments describing the bill as a test case for their own efforts and many others criticising the bill as government overreach.
Ban generates global debate
UK technology secretary Peter Kyle told the BBC he had discussed the ban with his Australian counterparts and would be closely following its implementation.
“I am totally open-minded and I certainly keep everything on the table as we go forward,” Kyle said. “But what I do want to do is make sure that any decisions I take are on the back of solid evidence.”
Several other European politicians expressed similar opinions of cautious support, with French education minister Anne Genetet confirming she would like to implement a similar ban.
The response wasn’t all positive, however – social media platforms spoke out against it in rapid order.
A Meta (Facebook and Threads owner) spokesperson said the company would comply with the ban but that the legislation itself was premature.
“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,” Meta said.
X owner Elon Musk was predictably against the ban, stating it was “a backdoor way to control access to the Internet by all Australians”.
Does the ban actually help kids?
While protests from social media companies are to be expected, there has also been criticism from socially minded organisations.
Tech industry advocacy group Digital Industry Group Inc (DIGI) managing director Sunita Bose questioned the true impact of the ban.
"The social media ban could push young people into darker, less safe corners of the Internet that do not have the safety guardrails that exist on mainstream platforms," she said.
While supporters of the ban point to the epidemic of online bullying as one of the core justifications for its implementation, messaging apps which are often the centre of such incidents like Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp have been exempted from the ban.
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has weighed in on this side of the debate, stating the law is “being pushed through Parliament without adequate consultation”.
“If the Government goes ahead with a blanket ban, it threatens to harm the very people it seeks to protect,” AHRC commissioner Lorraine Finlay and National Children’s commissioner Anne Hollonds wrote.
“We will be raising a generation of children, who upon turning 16 will be introduced to the harms of social media without adequate education and critical thinking skills to protect themselves online.
“Properly considered social media reform that benefits and protects us all is essential. Prohibition is not the answer.”
Suicide Prevention Australia executive director Christopher Stone agreed, stating the government has run “blindfolded into a brick wall”.
“While we acknowledge the challenges associated with online platforms, this legislation fails to consider the positive aspects of social media in supporting young people’s mental health and sense of connection,” Stone said.
Ban widely supported by Australians
The latest polling data indicates Australians are all for the ban, with 77% approving of it.
“The premise of this legislation is well-intentioned and likely to be widely popular,” Monash University director of Master of Strategic Communications Management Dr Mugdha Rai said.
“The devil, of course, is in the detail. As many have noted, this legislation has been pushed through in a very limited time frame.
“Regulating digital and social media has been notoriously difficult and, at this stage, the legislation raises a number of questions that will need answering.
“The legislation requires social media companies to take ‘reasonable steps’ to block people under 16. What would these ‘reasonable steps’ look like?
“How exactly will age be verified? By the platforms themselves, by a third party? Privacy concerns will clearly need to be addressed in either case.
“The government has given social media companies a 12-month timeline to work through these issues so it will be interesting to see how they respond.”
Only time will tell how effective the ban will be – there is already plenty of chatter about how to circumvent it with VPNs and similar technology – and whether the impact will be what its proponents hoped.