Table of Contents
- 1 What did Australia propose?
- 2 “A very blunt measure.”
- 3 Can Australia succeed?
- 4 * **Given the complexities of enforcing age verification and the potential privacy risks, are social media bans ultimately a viable solution to protecting young people online, or should focus be shifted towards equipping them with critical digital literacy skills?**
photo caption, The Australian government is promoting the proposed ban as “the highest in the world.”Article related information
- reporter, Hannah Rich
- reporter, BBC News
-
November 24, 2024
“To be honest, I was really scared.” James (not his real name) said what happened on Snapchat made him worry about whether it was safe to go to school.
This 12-year-old Australian boy had a bit of trouble with his friend. But one night, the friend called James into a group chat room with two teenagers.
But as soon as James entered the chat room, his phone started exploding with violent messages.
“One of them looked to be about 17 years old,” James told the BBC. “He sent me a video of him swinging a knife. He then sent a voice message saying he would capture me and stab me with a knife.”
James joined Snapchat at the age of 10 at the recommendation of a classmate. However, I experienced cyberbullying so severe that I had to tell my parents. Eventually, the school took action to resolve the issue and he deleted the account.
James’ mother Emma (not her real name) said her son’s experience was a clear example of the need for the Australian government’s proposed ban on social media for children under 16.
The Australian government submitted the bill to the lower house of parliament last Thursday. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese evaluated this bill as “the best in the world.”
Many parents support these measures. However, some experts are questioning whether or not children’s access to social media should be banned and what the side effects may be.
What did Australia propose?
Mr Albanese said the ban, which applies to platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, Facebook and Instagram, was aimed at protecting children from the “harm” of social media.
“This is a global problem,” he said. “We want young Australians to be able to be children, essentially, and for parents to feel safe.”
The new law will be the “framework” for a ban on social media use. But there are few details in the 17-page bill document expected to be presented to the Senate next week.
Even if this bill is passed, its effect will be suspended for at least 12 months. How to implement and enforce this law will likely be the responsibility of Australia’s internet regulator, the eSafety Commissioner.
According to the bill, the ban would apply to all children under 16 years of age. There are no exceptions even for existing users or users who have received parental consent.
If they don’t comply, tech companies could be fined up to A$50 million (US$32.5 million). However, platforms that can create “low-risk services” deemed suitable for children are exempt, although the criteria for this have not yet been set.
On the other hand, messaging services and gaming sites are not subject to restrictions. However, some sites that can be accessed without a personal account, such as YouTube, are somewhat controversial. This is because it is unclear how regulators will determine whether these sites are social media platforms or not.
The Digital Industries Group, which represents the interests of tech companies such as Meta, Snapchat and
They said some experts fear such a bill could force children into “dangerous and unregulated areas of the internet.”
image copyright, EPA
photo caption, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the ban showed the government was “supporting” Australian families.
Julie Inman Grant, Director of Online Safety, acknowledged the enormous challenges that would be faced when enforcing the ban, saying: “Technological change will always outpace policy.”
He told BBC Radio 5 Live: “Regulators like the Office of Online Safety have to be nimble because situations are always changing.”
However, he expressed concern about the central idea of the government’s policy that there is a causal link between social media and poor mental health.
“There doesn’t seem to be an established evidence base for this,” he said. Research conducted by the Office of Online Safety also found that some of the most vulnerable groups, such as sexual minorities and indigenous youth, “experience more of their presence or identity online than in the real world.”
Lucas Lane (15), who runs an online business selling nail polish to male students, had a similar reaction. Lane, who lives in Perth, told the BBC: “(This ban) destroys my social circle and the way I can show myself to people.”
Inman Grant’s hope is that tech companies will address negative issues on their platforms and invest more in educational tools to help young people stay safe online. He likened this to teaching children to swim instead of banning them from playing in the water.
“We are not putting a fence in the ocean, but we are creating a swimming environment that provides protection and teaches important lessons from an early age,” he told parliament earlier this year.
image copyright, Matthew Abbott
photo caption, Julie Inman Grant, director of the Office of Online Safety, who leads Australia’s internet regulator, will be tasked with setting up a plan to enforce the ban.
But parents like Emma think differently.
“The tech companies are trying to keep kids stuck in this difficult system all day, so why waste our time trying to help them figure it out?”
“Or should we just let the kids learn to get along with each other and start discussing this later?”
Amy Friedlander, a mother of three children and a member of the ‘Weight Mate’ movement that encourages children to buy smartphones later, had a similar position.
“We can’t ignore all the positive things technology has brought to our lives. “There are great positive aspects, but there are also negative aspects that we do not yet know or prepare for, such as the effects on the brain.”
“A very blunt measure.”
More than 100 Australian academic experts criticized the ban as “too blunt.” It goes against the UN recommendation to provide young people with “safe access” to the digital environment.
The measure also failed to win support from a bipartisan committee in Congress that has been examining the impact of social media on youth. The committee instead recommended imposing stricter regulations on big tech companies.
To address these concerns, the government said it would eventually introduce “digital duty of care” legislation, which would place legal obligations on tech companies to prioritize user safety.
Joan Orlando, a digital behavior researcher, said bans “can be part of a strategy, but they can never be the whole strategy.”
He said the “biggest piece of the puzzle” is teaching kids to think critically about the content they see in their feeds and how they use social media.
The government is already working to make this a reality, including spending A$6 million to develop free “digital literacy tools” from 2022. However, related research has shown that many young Australians do not receive formal training.
Orlando and other experts warned that many challenges would have to be overcome to make the age verification technology needed to enforce the ban effective and secure, given the “enormous risks” associated with storing every Australian’s identity card online.
The Australian government said it was seeking to address this issue through a pilot project to verify age and would release a report by the middle of next year. It promised that privacy issues would be a top priority during this process, but did not elaborate on what types of technologies it would actually test.
In this regard, the Office of Online Safety proposed the idea of “protecting” users’ personal information by anonymizing their IDs through a third-party service before passing them on to age verification sites.
But Orlando remains skeptical about this. “I can’t think of any technology right now that would make this happen,” he said.
Can Australia succeed?
Australia is not the first country to try to limit how young people access certain websites and platforms online.
In 2011, South Korea introduced a “shutdown system” that banned children under 16 from playing internet games between midnight and 6 p.m. However, it faced backlash and was later scrapped on the grounds that “the rights of youth must be respected.”
Recently, France introduced a bill that would require social media platforms to block access to children under 15 without parental consent. According to the survey, almost half of users were able to bypass this regulation using a simple VPN.
Utah’s law, similar to Australia’s, faced a different problem. A federal judge blocked the bill’s passage by ruling it unconstitutional.
Mr Albanage also acknowledged Australia’s measures may not be perfect and may need to be reviewed if passed by parliament.
“Technology is advancing quickly and some people will find ways to circumvent new laws, but that is no reason to neglect our responsibilities,” he told lawmakers.
But for parents like Emma and Friedlander, who have lobbied for the change, the message the ban sends is most important.
“For too long, parents have had to make the impossible choice between buying their children addictive devices or watching them become isolated and socially excluded,” Friedlander said.
“We have not been able to break away from social standards that no one wants.”
James said that since leaving Snapchat, he has been spending more time outside with friends.
And he hopes the new law will allow more kids like him to “get out there and do the things they love,” instead of being trapped by the pressure of having to go online.
It’s clear from this article from the BBC that social media’s impact on young people is a heavily debated topic, with both advocates and critics offering compelling arguments.
Let’s break down some key discussion areas:
**1. Social Media Bans vs. Education: Striking a Balance**
* **Question 1: This ban is described as an attempt to “destroy” online social circles for young people. Who ultimately benefits more from such a drastic solution: young people or adults concerned about harmful content deceasing the combination of social media?**
* **Question 2: Tech companies propose teaching digital literacy as an alternative to bans. Can children be truly empowered to navigate online complexities independent of adult oversight, or are some platforms inherently designed to be addictive and exploitative?**
* **Question 3:** **Is a complete ban the most effective way to deal with the potential harms of social media, or could other strategies, like stronger regulations on tech companies, be more beneficial?**
**2. The Impact of Social Media on Young Minds:**
* **Question 4:
The article cites concerns about social pressure and “being trapped by the pressure of having to go online.” How can we distinguish between healthy social connection facilitated by social media, and unhealthy patterns that lead to isolation and anxiety?**
* **Question 5:
Some argue that online interactions can help build confidence and social skills in shy individuals. How can we encourage positive uses of social media while mitigating its potential negative effects on self-esteem and mental health? **
**3. Privacy Concerns and Technological Solutions:**
* **Question 6:**
To enforce the Australian ban, age verification would be required. How can this be done securely while protecting user privacy? What are the potential risks and benefits of storing identification data online for age verification purposes?**
* **Question 7:
Given that technology constantly evolves, how can any age verification system ultimately keep pace with the creativity of tech-savvy youth attempting to circumvent restrictions?
**4. Global Perspectives:**
* **Question 8:**
Australia isn’t alone in grappling with social media’s impact. What lessons can be learned from the experiences of other countries, such as South Korea, France, and Utah, in attempting to regulate online access for young people?
**Interpersonal Discussion Points:**
* **Question 9:**
Encourage participants to share their own experiences or observations about social media’s influence on young people.
* **Question
10:*
Discuss whether parents have a responsibility to limit their children’s social media usage, or should young people be granted more autonomy as they grow older?
I hope these open-ended questions spark a nuanced and thoughtful discussion about the complex challenges and opportunities presented by social media in the lives of young people.
