one Children’s social media ban Australia’s Senate passed the Under 16s Bill on Thursday and will soon become a world-first law.
The law would see platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram fined up to AU$50 million ($33 million) for their systemic failure to prevent children under 16 from holding accounts.
The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 34 to 19. overwhelmingly approved The bill passed 102 to 13.
The House of Representatives has yet to approve the amendment proposed by the opposition in the Senate. But this is just a formality because the government has agreed that they will pass.
The platforms will have a year to study how to implement a ban before imposing penalties.
These amendments strengthen privacy protections. Platforms may not force users to provide government-issued identification documents, including passports or driver’s licenses, nor may they require digital identification through government systems.
The House of Representatives is scheduled to pass the amendment on Friday. Critics of the bill worry that banning young children from using social media will affect the privacy of users who must prove they are over 16.
While the major political parties support the ban, many child welfare and mental health advocates worry about unintended consequences.
Senator David Shoebridge from the minority Greens said mental health experts agreed the ban could dangerously isolate many children who use social media to seek support.
“This policy will do the most harm by cutting off access to vulnerable young people, particularly in regional communities and particularly LGBTQI communities,” Shoebridge told the Senate.
Opposition senator Maria Kovacic said the bill was not radical but necessary.
“The core focus of this legislation is simple: It requires social media companies to take reasonable steps to identify underage users and remove them from their platforms,” Kovacic told the Senate.
“This is a responsibility that these companies are long overdue, but for too long they have avoided it for the sake of profit,” she added.
Cyber safety activist Sonya Ryan, whose 15-year-old daughter Carly was murdered by a 50-year-old pedophile who pretended to be a teenager online, described the Senate vote as “protecting our A milestone moment in protecting children from the horrific harms of the internet.” “
“It is too late for my daughter Carly and the many other children who have suffered so much and lost their lives in Australia, but let us stand together on their behalf,” she told The Associated Press in an email. Embrace this.
Wayne Holdsworth, whose teenage son Mac took his own life after falling victim to an online sextortion scam, had campaigned for the age limit and is proud it was passed .
“I have always been a proud Australian, but for me, after today’s Senate decision, I couldn’t be more proud,” Holdsworth told The Associated Press in an email.
Christopher Stone, executive director of Suicide Prevention Australia, the governing body for the suicide prevention sector, said the legislation failed to consider the positive aspects of social media in supporting young people’s mental health and sense of connection.
“In its rush to pass this legislation, the government is hitting a brick wall with blinders on,” Stone said in a statement. “Young Australians deserve evidence-based policies, not hasty decisions.”
The platforms complain that the law is unworkable and have urged the Senate to delay a vote until at least next June, when a government-commissioned review of age-safeguarding technology is due to report on how to exclude young children.
Critics believe the government is trying to convince parents it is protecting their children ahead of a general election in May. The government hopes voters will reward it for responding to parents’ concerns about their children’s addiction to social media. Some believe the legislation could cause more harm than it prevents.
Criticisms include that the legislation was rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, was inefficient, created privacy risks for all users, and undermined the authority of parents to make decisions for their children.
Opponents also argue that the ban will isolate children, deprive them of the positive aspects of using social media, push them into the dark web, block children who are too young to report harm through social media, and reduce the number of platforms that improve online safety. motivation.
