Writer Robyn Gargan weighs up whether a social media ban for children is really a force for good
Since the first social media site was launched in 1997, the internet has exploded with exponential growth of users, apps, and danger. Parents who grew up with limited access to the internet are having to navigate unprecedented territory where for their children, a life without social media is unimaginable. An Ofcom survey found that 99% of children in Britain today spend time online. Whilst the growth of social media has been rapid, the legislative response has been anything but. Governments and international organisations have trundled along behind the expansion of social media, implementing guidelines and restrictions that often seem too little, too late. Gone are the days where the internet was a place, a computer logged onto and then left. Now it is everywhere. The online is inescapable, and it is disproportionately harming the youth. Something must be done, and the Australian government has decided it is time to act.
At the end of November, the Australian government, in one of the world’s strictest measures against internet use for minors, voted to ban all social media use for all children under the age of 16. The ban, which will come into effect within the next year, comes under a law titled ‘The Social Media Minimum Age Bill’ which rules that social media platforms including Snapchat, TikTok, and X will have to impose measures to prevent those under 16 signing up for accounts on their platforms or risk fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars (£25 million). Australia is not the first to attempt to regulate social media use: some EU countries have laws which only allow minors to access platforms with parental permission, but the Australian ban goes further: it is absolute. This ban does not apply to all social media platforms- exemptions will apply for health and education platforms including YouTube, WhatsApp, and Kids helpline. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the ban was proposed to mitigate “harm” inflicted on Australian children by social media, stating “This one is for the mums and dads… They, like me, are worried sick about the safety of our kids online. I want Australian families to know that the government has your back.” The move seems to be widely popular in Australia with polling in a national survey showing 77 percent of the population backed the legislation. However, with the line between the real world and the online increasingly blurred, opposition voices have argued that the ban does not only isolate children, but actively excludes them from participating in society.
The ban has been criticized for being strategically rushed through parliament, with some angling that this is a move for political gain; the government trying to prove to parents that they are taking steps to protect their children before the next general election, in May. This is despite the fact that the ban breezed through the parliamentary vote, supported by both the government and opposition parties. Still, the public was given only a 24-hour window in which to submit responses to the legislation before it was voted on, and opposition in this period came from 15,000 groups including UNICEF and Amnesty International. UNICEF criticized the ban’s short consolation period, its implications on children’s wellbeing and its undermining of children’s right to exercise ‘freedom of expression, access to information, and participation in public life’. These concerns echo those expressed by LGBT support groups – that vulnerable children might use social media as a support network where they can feel a sense of belonging and community that they may not have with family or friends. There are fears that this detachment from the internet could lead to loneliness and mental health issues, the very problem for which the bill is being proposed in order to prevent. In fact, in the same legislative period the Australian government introduced this social media ban, they have slashed spending on mental health care.
However, for many in Australia, whilst radical, this is a huge step towards protecting their children from the real physical and ideological dangers the internet poses. Excessive social media use is a normal part of life in the 21st century, and has consequences, especially for children, including the risks to girls from harmful depictions of body image, and increased misogyny among young boys. The police have expressed concerns over online influencers promoting extreme misogyny and radicalizing young men This comes after the National Chiefs Council published a report in 2023 declaring violence and women and girls a ‘national emergency’. Much of this real-life violence begins online with 65 percent of Australian women and girls saying they have experienced online harassment. This legislation does take important steps in stopping children from having access to harmful views but fails to tackle the root cause of censoring those who are expressing and promoting them, instead leaving regulating users in the hands of social media platforms.
It is obvious that something must be done to protect children from the dangers of social media. Never before have children been able to access any information, any person, any idea at any time or place in a way that is so difficult for parents to regulate. The Australian blanket ban may or may not be the correct way forward; however, it is a bold, radical step in regulating social media, and leaders around the world will surely be watching the results carefully to see if this could be the solution to such a complex problem.
