Key Points
- Elon Musk has criticized the government for its plan to ban children under 16 from social media.
- Musk, owner of social media platform X, accused the government of trying to “control access to the internet.”
- The federal government presented a draft ban to Parliament on Thursday.
Elon Musk is lashing out at the Albanian government’s new social media ban on children under 16, saying the government is trying to “control access to the internet.”
The owner of social networking site took to the podium to denounce the new laws.
“This seems like a backdoor way of controlling access to the internet for all Australians,” he wrote in response to a tweet from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
Albanese wrote: “TODAY: we are introducing our bill to set the minimum age for social media at 16.”
The post was accompanied by a “community note” on X, a tool for adding “helpful notes” to posts that could be considered “misleading.”
The community note on Albanese’s post read: “This bill will require identity or age verification for all Australians wishing to use social media, including adults. The government has confirmed that This is the only way to apply it.”
The federal government THURSDAY.
Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the ban was about “protecting young people, not punishing or isolating them”.
What does the Online Safety Bill actually contain?
The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 will introduce a minimum age of 16 to have an account on age-restricted social media platforms.
The government says the bill will place a responsibility on social media platforms to “take reasonable steps to ensure fundamental protections are in place”.
This will require platforms to introduce systems and settings to ensure that underage users cannot create or hold a social media account. A systemic failure could be considered a violation.
The ban will affect platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat.
Messaging apps such as WhatsApp, online gaming platforms and services whose “primary purpose is to support the health and education of end users” are excluded from the bill.
This should also include YouTube. Anonymous web forums like 4chan and Reddit will also likely be excluded because they are accessible to users without creating an account.
It’s unclear how platforms will have to deal with the millions of existing users who will be affected by the ban.
Age Verification Process
Under the bill, it is expected that all Australians wishing to access the affected platforms will have to undergo an age verification process.
At a Senate budget hearing earlier this month, James Chisholm, deputy secretary of the Department of Communications, confirmed that “everyone [would] must go through an age verification process.
However, it’s unclear what additional data people will need to submit to social media companies to keep their accounts.
The government said the move “may require the collection, use and disclosure of additional personal information.”
While acknowledging concerns about the negative impact of social media on children, a mandatory age limit was “a Trojan horse for creating digital identities”, said Michael Shellenberger, an advocate for free speech and the fight against censorship.
It would be “a giant step towards the totalitarian dystopia depicted in (TV show) Black Mirror, and already in place in China,” he said.
The federal government has ruled out mandatory digital identifications and the Coalition has drawn a red line on their implementation.
The government says the bill will “enable young people to use the internet in a safer and more positive way”.
Opposition communications spokesperson David Coleman also said the Coalition would work with the government to finalize the legislation.
“Parents lie awake at night worrying about what their kids are exposed to on Snapchat or TikTok or Instagram,” he said.
“We have seen some very worrying trends in mental health among Australian children, particularly girls, over the last decade.”
But several experts have expressed concern about the ban.
In October, 140 experts wrote a to Albanese, arguing: “a ‘ban’ is too blunt an instrument to effectively manage risks.”
The Australian Human Rights Commission also said it had “serious reservations” about the ban “given the potential for these laws to significantly interfere with the rights of children and young people”.
Instead, he suggested introducing measures to reduce harm, such as the ability to disable personal algorithms and implementing a “duty of care” model, as the government moves forward .
The ban is expected to take effect at least a year after the bill is passed.
– With additional reporting from the Australian Associated Press.
