MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australia’s communications minister introduced a world-first law into Parliament on Thursday that would ban children under 16 from social media, saying online safety was one of parents’ toughest challenges.
Michelle Rowland said TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram were among the platforms that would face fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts.
“This bill seeks to set a new normative value in society that accessing social media is not the defining feature of growing up in Australia,” Rowland told Parliament.
“There is wide acknowledgement that something must be done in the immediate term to help prevent young teens and children from being exposed to streams of content unfiltered and infinite,” she added.
X owner Elon Musk warned that Australia intended to go further, posting on his platform: “Seems like a backdoor way to control access to the Internet by all Australians.”
The bill has wide political support. After it becomes law, the platforms would have one year to work out how to implement the age restriction.
“For too many young Australians, social media can be harmful,” Rowland said. “Almost two-thirds of 14- to 17-years-old Australians have viewed extremely harmful content online including drug abuse, suicide or self-harm as well as violent material. One quarter have been exposed to content promoting unsafe eating habits.”
Government research found that 95% of Australian care-givers find online safety to be one of their “toughest parenting challenges,” she said. Social media had a social responsibility and could do better in addressing harms on their platforms, she added.
“This is about protecting young people, not punishing or isolating them, and letting parents know that we’re in their corner when it comes to supporting their children’s health and wellbeing,” Rowland said.
Child welfare and internet experts have raised concerns about the ban, including isolating 14- and 15-year-olds from their already established online social networks.
Rowland said there would not be age restrictions placed on messaging services, online games or platforms that substantially support the health and education of users.
“We are not saying risks don’t exist on messaging apps or online gaming. While users can still be exposed to harmful content by other users, they do not face the same algorithmic curation of content and psychological manipulation to encourage near-endless engagement,” she said.
The government announced last week that a consortium led by British company Age Check Certification Scheme has been contracted to examine various technologies to estimate and verify ages.
In addition to removing children under 16 from social media, Australia is also looking for ways to prevent children under 18 from accessing online pornography, a government statement said.
Age Check Certification Scheme’s chief executive Tony Allen said Monday the technologies being considered included age estimation and age inference. Inference involves establishing a series of facts about individuals that point to them being at least a certain age.
Rowland said the platforms would also face fines of up to AU$50 million ($33 million) if they misused personal information of users gained for age-assurance purposes.
Information used for age assurances must be destroyed after serving that purpose unless the user consents to it being kept, she said.
Digital Industry Group Inc., an advocate for the digital industry in Australia, said with Parliament expected to vote on the bill next week, there might not be time for “meaningful consultation on the details of the globally unprecedented legislation.”
“Mainstream digital platforms have strict measures in place to keep young people safe, and a ban could push young people on to darker, less safe online spaces that don’t have safety guardrails,” DIGI managing director Sunita Bose said in a statement. “A blunt ban doesn’t encourage companies to continually improve safety because the focus is on keeping teenagers off the service, rather than keeping them safe when they’re on it.”