Yesterday the Australian Federal Government revealed the age limit on its proposed social media ban, pegging the legislation at the 16-years-of-age mark in direct alignment with the Coalition’s supported age.
The ban proposes to restrict access to all Australians below the age of 16 across social media channels and streaming platforms such as YouTube.
The proposal could also include certain online multiplayer games like Roblox and chat services like Discord.
“I’ve spoken to thousands of parents, grandparents, aunties and uncles. They, like me, are worried sick about the safety of our kids online,” Prime Minister Albanese said.
Is the ban too vague?
While it will be at least another 12 months before the ban is put into effect, it’s fairly likely to pass the House of Representatives, as the Coalition has already signalled its support.
“There is clearly a growing frustration in Australia regarding the increasing intrusion of social media platforms in our children’s lives,” Monash University director Dr Mugdha Rai said.
“Concerns have been raised across the spectrum by parents, educators and mental health experts for a number of years.
“The premise of this legislation therefore is well-intentioned and likely to be widely popular.
“The devil, of course, is in the detail. 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. So far, the government has indicated an awareness of these concerns and a timeline to work through them.”
How effective are digital age restrictions?
There is also a question of how easy it will be to circumvent the ban.
As the entertainment industry has discovered over the last decade or so, it’s not easy to stop internet users from accessing content, even when it’s legally restricted.
“The research tells us age restrictions on social media don't work in practice, with the technology also often failing,” Monash University School of Education Culture and Society lecturer Dr Stephanie Wescott said.
“There are also important social and support benefits to social media for young people that make addressing the content more desirable than blocking young people completely from the platforms.
“Social media is an important space for lots of young people, especially for minority young people who benefit from social support from peers and who use social media to support their identity formation.
“The influence of misogynist and sexist rhetoric online from commentators like Andrew Tate is a key driver behind the calls for these types of bans, and the discourse goes beyond the digital sphere, so we also need to address these concerning socio-political discourses and ensure our young people are equipped to be democratic participants and responsible consumers of media later in life.
“It would be far more productive to focus on critical media and digital literacies, to support young people's skills in critically consuming information they receive online.”
Social media giants like Meta are also weighing in on the proposed ban, pointing to higher levels of parental access and control as a more desirable method to achieving similar results.
"We're obviously going to comply with whatever government decision is made," said Meta's head of global safety Antigone Davis.
"But I really would love for us to see a system that … really listens to what parents have said."