The Australian under 16 social media ban

Written By: - Date published: 9:22 am, November 29th, 2024 - 7 comments
Categories: social media - Tags: ,

Throwing up a quick post so we can discuss this in context. The bill has passed and will take effect in 12 months time.

From RNZ,

Children and teenagers will be banned from using social media from the end of next year after the Australian government’s world-first legislation passed the parliament with bipartisan support.

That means anyone under the age of 16 will be blocked from using platforms including TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat and Facebook, a move the government and the Coalition argue is necessary to protect their mental health and wellbeing.

…

Under the laws, which will not come into force for another 12 months, social media companies could be fined up to $50 million for failing to take “reasonable steps” to keep under 16s off their platforms.

There are no penalties for young people or parents who flout the rules.

Social media companies also won’t be able to force users to provide government identification, including the Digital ID, to assess their age.

“Messaging apps”, “online gaming services” and “services with the primary purpose of supporting the health and education of end-users” will not fall under the ban, as well as sites like YouTube that do not require users to log in to access the platform.

A few thoughts. One is that the legal obligation is being placed on social media companies. This is good, because it’s the social media giants that are intentionally using internet technology including algorithms to do some heavy duty manipulation of basically everyone on the internet, and this is especially problematic for people under 16 (for reasons I hope I don’t have to explain).

It also appears to not be an actual ban, because most social media allows pseudonymous accounts. So I see this as a step by regulators to tell the social media giants to pull their fucking heads in. Again, good.

However, trying to ban kids from stuff means they just find other ways. The problems with social media companies are that society lets the tech bros have lots of money and even more power with very little control. No sane society does that, and it’s pretty easy to make the case to take the toys from the boys rather than trying to protect kids and younger teens when they will access in other ways. Social media harms adults too, and the whole of society.

The Centre for Humane Technology, founded by people that used to work for the social media giants, have an overview of the the issues,

  • Today’s youth face unprecedented physical, mental, and social challenges exacerbated by fast-changing tech.
  • Technology is extracting our attention, weakening our memory, and driving addiction, loneliness, and depression.
  • Synthetic media, misinformation, sensationalism, bad actors, and coordinated bots are destroying our information ecosystem.
  • Maximizing engagement amplifies outrage, deepens divisions, and reduces empathy, which is eroding shared consensus.
  • Our data is exploited by an industry that extracts our attention, shapes our thoughts and behaviors, and makes us vulnerable to risks – all for profit.

They also have a set of pathways to solutions here.


I haven’t seen the definition of social media in the Australian law, please post if you find it. I consider The Standard to be SM, but I doubt site like this would be included because we don’t require a login. Lprent will hopefully write something on this.

Finally, the great Ozzy Man weighs in, with a 14 min video laying out some of the issues from his point of view as a parent, aging millennial, and someone with a social media degree and livelihood. He has a brief explanation of how social media tipped over into evil.

7 comments on “The Australian under 16 social media ban ”

  1. higherstandard 1
    29 November 2024 at 10:25 am

    Well done our Australian cousins. Youth in Australia will have to relearn how to communicate with each and hopefully spend less of their time glued to screens filled with vacuous nonsense or worse.

    Reply
  2. gsays 2
    29 November 2024 at 10:52 am

    I had already put a comment on Open Mike expressing cynicism about bans/prohibition before reading this.

    The pressure coming on the largely unregulated internet giants is a subtle difference.

    I think of R16/R18 video games and the plethora of parents/guardians/ siblings that provide them to 'underagers'.

    A law is only as good as it's enforcement and acceptance. I think 14 was the minimum age for FB 8 or so years ago. Didn't stop a few parents I know getting accounts for their youngsters. Plus these big companies have resources that a lot of states can only dream about. They will do a lot to protect their business interests.

    Time will tell but it feels like this is the easy way to deal with problems that need complex and multi-faceted solutions.

    Reply
    • weka 2.1
      29 November 2024 at 11:24 am

      I tend to agree, and I see a couple of valuable things. One is the more power that government regain over social media regulation, the better. This might be a foot in the door. The other is that it shift perception in the general culture about the dangers of social media.

      FB is one of the few that require real life names to be used and actually enforce it (to an extent). I can't see the other companies wanting to follow suit. Hoping someone reads the actual legislation so we know what is meant by the law in regards to real life ID and the companies' responsibilities. RNZ say they can't require government ID, but there are plenty of other ways to do this. That's huge if it's true and it works, because it's effectively the end of easily made pseudonyms on the big platforms. I haven't read enough to know how strict this is from the Aussies.

      Reply
      • Karolyn_IS 2.1.1
        29 November 2024 at 12:08 pm

        I haven't noticed FB enforcing real life names. I don't really trust them, especially after reading Shoshana Zuboff 's The Age of Surveillance capitalism. Google pioneered a way to stay one step ahead of laws regarding privacy and use of people's online metadata with each new innovation. FB was a fast follower.

        They basically devised algorithms to use the metadata to learn a lot about individuals, and how to manipulate them. They then sell their findings to commercial enterprises, and political organisations. That's why they make their platforms and services free. It's all about the money that is gained from the use of our metadata.

        People of all ages should maybe be wary about using big social media platforms. They can develop metadata to analyse our emotions from audio and video we use online. FB can track everything we do online even when we aren’t logged into FB.

        Of course young people are the most easily manipulated, which is why advertisers often target them. Targeting the companies is a good idea, but they are very slippery legally.I think it's a good idea for parents and teachers to provide guidance to children in their use of online sources.

        I also am not keen of the politicisation of social media eg Musk supporting Trump, and now Zuckerberg trying to get onside with Trump.

        Reply
        • weka 2.1.1.1
          29 November 2024 at 12:17 pm

          I'm both horrified by Musk basically siding with the fascists, but also relieved that it's now finally out in the open. Zuckerberg is the same. I expect most of the big SM company heads are like this, we just don't hear about the others in the same way.

          Reply

Leave a Comment

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.