I’ve been following the news surrounding banning of social media for anyone under 16 in Australia for a week or two now, and it seems that new events are unfolding which contradicts my expectations. An article written by BBC describes the tabled bill as “world-leading,”[1] which, sounds like an accurate description to me. The article further points out that the proposed ban is only 17-pages long, and provides framework for the ban without much detail.[2] Companies that do not comply would be facing penalty up to $5,000,000 AUD according to the ban with exceptions to services that provide to “low-risk services” for children.[3] The proposed ban would make the social media platforms responsible for banning anyone under 16 from having accounts on social media platforms.[4]
The article further points that the central idea behind the ban is the causal link between declining mental health and social media, while also noting research on how vulnerable groups find online space allows them to feel more themselves.[5] An argument against the proposed bill I found notable was the utilitarian use of social media for business purposes such as marketing a product and doing sales online.[6] While it is not mentioned in the article, I’ve personally seen some of the social media challenges that looks extremely dangerous, and anecdotally heard about the consequences of them, although it is unclear how big of a problem this is in Australia.
Other concerns included pushing children into much harmful space on the internet such as the darknet,[7] although I personally have a bit of hard time relating to this argument because, in my opinion, the draw of the social media is, as the name suggests, the sociable nature of the products, and I am not sure if dark web provides such wide and pervasive sociability among individuals, especially younger people.
Honestly, I never expected this bill to even pass legislation, but it turns out I was dead wrong as it passed 102 to 13 just today.[8] While it hasn’t become law yet, it seems the chance of it becoming one is much higher than I was expecting. I further found a poll which suggests that 77% of Australians are in support of the ban, which,[9] is flabbergasting to me.
Obviously, there has been some backlash from the social media companies with Google and Meta urging Australia to delay the bill, and of course, X (formerly Twitter), went as far as to raise concerns surrounding human rights, freedom of expression and access to information for children.[10] I personally think the biggest problem will be enforcement of the law, if it becomes one, as many articles I read point out. Additionally, there seems to be some concerns surrounding how fast the bill is moving through the system with opposition Senator Matt Canavan pointed out how rushed the bill was and provided a timeline of how the bill progressed so far:
November 22, 2024: Bill becomes available to the public.
November 23, 2024: Submissions Closed
November 25, 2024: Public Hearing
November 26, 2024: Deadline for Committee Report
At the end of the day, it is about regulating companies selling harmful products to certain groups of consumers who may suffer from the negative effects of the product more severely. Of course, this is extremely reductive and consideration of utility behind social media and the positive aspects of it when used correctly cannot be overlooked. Personally, what makes this complex in my mind is how pervasive and ubiquitous social media is. As someone who rarely uses social media, I still find it hard to escape being exposed to, or engaging one even unintentionally, which makes me wonder if the ban will truly be effective. Furthermore, I remember discussion during lecture on more regulations for companies and one of the reasons for countries not enacting tougher regulation is due to the corporation’s losing competitiveness in a global market. Considering this, I wonder how this would affect any Australian social media companies, especially those that are just starting out.
To finish it off, I could not help but relate it to discussions during when professor Bakan was in class as a guest lecturer, as well as Berle’s argument in Professor Bakan’s article Reflection: Corporate Capitalism’s Moral Lack surrounding necessity of legally regulating corporations for social values.[12] That said, thinking more about it makes me wonder if this issue is any different from, or less severe compared to what personally feels more extensible, such as environmental problems. Perhaps the issue at hand exemplifies what happens when companies are left abated in pursuit of profit. I must say, for legislation with a seemingly huge impact, it does seem quite hasty although I am too ignorant to comment on other implications. I think, at the very least, this does show the extent to which a country is willing to go in terms of regulating a number of giant corporations in pursuit of public interest.
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgl4dyjg57do
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid
[4] https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/international/2024/11/26/australia-social-media-ban-nears-vote-despite-lawmaker-concerns/
[5] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgl4dyjg57do
[6] Ibid
[7] https://apnews.com/article/australia-social-media-young-children-bf0ca2aedaf61b71fe335421240e94c4
[8] Ibid
[9] https://au.yougov.com/politics/articles/51000-support-for-under-16-social-media-ban-soars-to-77-among-australians
[10] https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-meta-urge-australia-delay-bill-social-media-ban-children-2024-11-26/
[11] https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/international/2024/11/26/australia-social-media-ban-nears-vote-despite-lawmaker-concerns/
[12] https://bizorglaw.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2024/10/reflection-corporate-capitalisms-moral-lack-copy.pdf (Page 313)
Thanks for your post! I have also been following this story in the news for the last week, and was similarly surprised, and impressed, to hear that the ban passed with ease.
I recognize how social media can be an important forum for some young people, particularly those who are LGBTQ2s+ or those with disabilities who can use online spaces to forge community that they may not otherwise be able to access at their schools or in their communities. However, I think the net harm of social media – short attention spans, anxiety, body dysmorphia – to young people outweighs this one benefit.
I also thought that this legislation was a really fantastic example of the regulation that Bakan was advocating for. I’ve noticed in the last few months an increasing number of ads from YouTube, Google, and Facebook that market their child safety features to parents. These features allow parents to create “limits” to ensure that their children aren’t free to roam the wild west of the web. While I think it’s important to have these kinds of features so parents have the liberty to limit what their children see on the internet, I also find that these features shift the onus of responsibility onto parents, rather than these social media organizations or the state. Parents are already busy enough as is, and therefore don’t need yet another domain where they have to spend time/ attention fretting about what their child is going to be exposed to. Although there have been many calls for social media platforms to better regulate content and tighten their community standards, even if these platforms did do better in that regard, it would by no means create social media that is child appropriate. In light of this, I think that the ban for young people will be overall helpful to parents, and filling a gap that social media platforms have long resisted.
Such an interesting post! I had no idea that Australia was doing this and I’ll be surprised if it actually works in a world where teens know how to use VPNs. At the very least, hopefully younger children will be shielded, which I see as a good thing because of how predatory childrens advertising is (like in those examples from The Corporation movie), but I can definitely see teens figuring out a way around it.
As the other commenter says, online spaces are important for young people to navigate and be able to develop their social skills. I recently read an article about how third-places, neutral hang-out spaces that are especially important for youths (think bowling alleys, malls, etc) are disappearing so it’s even more important for teens to be able to socialize online. (https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/as-torontos-best-gathering-places-disappear-young-people-like-me-are-stuck-at-home-on/article_b651883c-43b8-11ef-88cf-dbadd01809d4.html). What seems more important is to actually teach youth about online literacy so that they can navigate safely.
Thinking specifically in terms of the social media companies however–I do think this bill creates a space for a new company to rise that’s made for youth and is purely based on socializing, not content creation, without ads or marketing. I remember using MSN messenger as a kid and I don’t remember clicking on any ads then!