Australia has made history with the passage of its groundbreaking “Social Media Minimum Age” bill, which bans children under 16 from using social media platforms. This unprecedented move, passed by Parliament on the final day of its legislative session, positions Australia as a global test case for stringent regulations targeting Big Tech.
What the Ban Entails
Under the new law, social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X (formerly Twitter), and Reddit, are required to prevent under-16s from accessing their services. Companies that fail to comply face fines of up to AUD 50 million (USD 32 million). Notably, YouTube, due to its educational purpose, is exempt.
Read More: Pakistan thrash Australia by nine wickets in second ODI
Unlike other countries with parental consent clauses, Australia’s ban is absolute, setting it apart from restrictions seen in the United States and France. The law mandates tech companies to enforce the age limit within a year, with trials for age-verification methods, including biometrics or government ID checks, starting in January 2025.
Push for Regulation
The legislation is a response to growing concerns about the mental health impact of social media on young Australians. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese cited a “clear, causal link” between social media and issues such as anxiety, bullying, and self-harm among teenagers. The move follows harrowing testimonies from parents of children who died by suicide after being bullied online.
Support for the bill has been strong, with a YouGov poll showing 77% of Australians back the measure, up from 61% in August. Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp ran a campaign titled “Let Them Be Kids,” amplifying public sentiment against Big Tech’s perceived lack of accountability.
Criticism and Concerns
Despite its popularity, the law has sparked significant opposition. Critics argue that the rushed process—passing within a week with limited consultation—has left critical gaps in its implementation. Privacy advocates and experts have raised alarms about potential misuse of personal data required for age verification.
Elon Musk, owner of X, denounced the legislation as a “backdoor way to control access to the internet.” Digital rights groups have echoed concerns, suggesting the law could push teens toward unregulated platforms like 4chan or the dark web.
Additionally, experts warn the ban could inadvertently harm vulnerable youth who rely on social media for support networks, mental health resources, and advocacy. Christopher Stone of Suicide Prevention Australia stated, “Cutting off this access risks exacerbating feelings of loneliness and isolation.”
Global Implications
Australia’s move is being closely watched internationally. While some U.S. states and France have implemented partial restrictions, no other country has imposed such a sweeping ban. The legislation is seen as a bold step in holding tech companies accountable, but its success—or failure—could influence similar policies worldwide.
Challenges to Implementation
The bill leaves significant details unresolved. The Australian Senate has recommended against using sensitive documents like passports for age verification, raising questions about feasible alternatives. Critics, including Meta and Snapchat, argue that the law lacks clear guidelines for enforcement.
Meta has suggested waiting for the results of planned age-assurance trials, while Snap Inc. advocates for device-level verification. Concerns have also been raised about excluding platforms like YouTube and online gaming sites, which pose similar risks but are exempt from the ban.
Broader Context
This is not Australia’s first confrontation with Big Tech. The country previously made headlines by requiring platforms to pay royalties to media outlets for shared content. The new ban, however, escalates tensions, particularly with U.S.-based tech giants.
Read More: Pakistan man caught at Sydney Airport turns out to be former …
Domestically, the law is seen as a political win for Albanese’s government, which faces sagging approval ratings ahead of the 2025 election. By championing the ban, the government aims to present itself as a defender of children’s safety and mental health.