Social Media Ban for under 16s

just-human on 07/11/2024 - 19:10
Last edited 07/11/2024 - 19:45

The Australian Government is considering implementing a blanket social media ban for under 16s. This would involve using un-tested age verification technology and could expose users of social media platforms to privacy and data breaches.

Link to ABC article.

I think that it should be up to parents to decide when using social media suits their child. It seems ridiculous that we are trying to rush through legislation when we haven't tested the technology to support it. It also seems pretty extreme that we might have to verify our ID to sign up for social media platforms, especially when age verification technology has not been successfully implemented anywhere.

Edit: Here is the list of social media platforms I found on the Guardian article: BeReal, Facebook Messenger, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, Snapchat, Steam, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, Discord, Signal, Pinterest, WhatsApp and Telegram.

The list could be more but, interestingly, Signal, Whatsapp, and Telegram are on there. These are platforms that use end-to-end encryption that the government will now have linked to your ID if these laws go through.

Do you support the social media ban?

Poll Options expired

  • 800
    Yes, I support it
  • 382
    No, I do not support it
  • 36
    Maybe, I think we should wait for more info
Internet

Comments

      • just-human on 09/11/2024 - 23:35
        +1

        One of the hypothesis is that this is caused by social media.

        Partially agree. I don't think it's because of social media itself, but rather the inability to use it effectively. This is a parent's responsibility to make sure the child can use it effectively. Why are we all having our privacy compromised because of a few parents?

        The government is using this either as Trojan Horse legislation (which I think it may be) for expanding Digital ID to social platforms and improve monitoring capabilities, or they're using this as a populist move and create a band-aid solution to a problem. I'm sure people know that proper parenting can fix this, but programs that support that would be costly and (more importantly) not have immediate results that they can take to next year's election. With this band-aid they can somewhat say they did something without actually showing results because it will take a year to implement anyways.

        • iridiumstem on 09/11/2024 - 23:45
          +1

          Well, I probably should have said introduction of social media. We didn't know what it was, but it could have had a negative impact on children and their interaction with the world. The fact that the huge decline is very limited to the group of people who are exposed to social media more (you see little to no changes to the trend in people over 60s) and it kinda starts at around when social media started to become big, I think does at least make some sense.

          As with using social media effectively, I feel like something similar to what we say about alcohol applies, there is no "safe level" of alcohol consumption. Social media has its positives like how alcohol has its positives, but ultimately, I would argue that the world would be better place without them.

          That said, I don't think that's a place that will ever exist in future. As in, social media will continue to exist, and the best course of action isn't banning it. Banning something is not regulating, it's just shutting eyes and ears to go "lah lah this isn't here anymore".

          Rule of the second best, you cannot get rid of social media from the world, therefore the best solution isn't trying to pretend that it doesn't exist or trying your best to eliminate it (people want it, someone somewhere will create something similar). It might be doing something completely different (i.e. having supports and education around how to be safe online etc) that may give us an outcome that's most beneficial.

          • just-human on 09/11/2024 - 23:54
            +2

            @iridiumstem:

            We didn't know what it was

            As a young person, social media is probably the least of my concerns. Up there are probably rising cost of living, economic instability, increasing global conflict, and political polarisation to name a few. These are all real things that impact my life. Social media is something that we can control ourselves, all the issues I mentioned are something that individuals cannot, hence the role of government.

            I would argue that the world would be a better place without them.

            I disagree. I would say the benefits for me overall have outweighed the costs as mentioned earlier.

  • H3R34TH4C0MM3NTS on 10/11/2024 - 01:13
    -1

    Well i think the issue is more so about the ability to publish and engage on these platforms is what needs to be restricted and moderated for minors.
    It think its sensible that you should only be able to publish and engage if you have had your identity confirmed, just like with AirBNB. by all means you can use a psudonym publicly but the platform should be able to to confirm your identity

  • burns13 on 10/11/2024 - 03:35
    +2

    There's good intentions behind this policy but I am sad the free open web is chipped away little by little every year.

    Also the 16 year old me would have bypassed the s#hit out of this silly law

    • SpainKing on 11/11/2024 - 17:22
      +1

      Also the 16 year old me would have bypassed the s#hit out of this silly law

      burns13 in his hacker trenchcoat, hat and sunglasses, carefully inputting the details of his ID the day of his 16th Birthday when the ban no longer applies to him

      • burns13 on 11/11/2024 - 17:26
        +1

        1337

  • DiscoJango on 10/11/2024 - 08:31

    Just like drug and alcohol retreats, ppl should do/try social media retreats. The weekends where im so busy that i dont have time to doom scroll, i actually feel a bit better about myself not wasting so much time on it lol

  • Relapse on 10/11/2024 - 12:06

    As someone who grew up with the advent of social media, an IT professional and now a parent I'm 100% for this - Social media is absolute trash and the harder it is to access the better, kids don't need it or the pressure to participate in it in their life. The whole digital id rant is a farce in this context.

    • just-human on 10/11/2024 - 13:43
      +1

      Okay, why not simply raise the age for it but not introduce Digital ID into it? That way he can still achieve the goal of being able to say "that's illegal".

  • mirz on 10/11/2024 - 12:44
    +1

    Albo is once again focusing on totally irrelevant area. We shouldn’t be surprised with his shenanigans.

    People are going through financial crises, rental crises, small businesses are on verge of collapse but idiotic focus is on banning kids from social media. Next, he will be going around measuring kids height and waist line.

    We need to introduce mandatory brain CT scans for all politicians before they can even go for elections.

    • BargainKen on 10/11/2024 - 17:05
      +1

      Albo's too busy charging his EV with solar power overnight. I'm starting to think he's of Irish descent.

  • Terra Australis on 10/11/2024 - 14:20
    +1

    What’s the issue? Just VPN and bypass it.

  • quick-dry on 10/11/2024 - 18:55
    +2

    WhatsApp is banned, but iMessage is not also a similar "social media platform"?

    the whole thing is preposterous abdication of responsibility as parents, but moreover, these are poorly thought out - if they actually were followed then they're terrible, but in reality where they won't be followed they'll just make things worse for the people who weren't 'protected' by these laws anyway.

    Once it starts making things worse for the politicians, I'm sure we'll see them being unwound littlte by little

  • fubariam2 on 10/11/2024 - 21:01
    +1

    They should include a Ban on Gambling ads

  • JimmyF on 10/11/2024 - 21:32
    +3

    For those who think this won't impact them…. "everyone will have to go through the age verification process" Its not so much a bill to block under 16yo, more a bill to verify everyone who uses the service is over 16 or older!

    https://x.com/FetchStep/status/1855463809160216751

  • ajr5k on 10/11/2024 - 22:28
    +2

    I want to support a age restriction for social media, but I cannot see how this can be done without collecting a massive amount of data on every single Australian internet user…

  • noideaa on 11/11/2024 - 01:10

    What if they take their parent’s ID’s to get what they want?

    • JimmyF on 11/11/2024 - 09:13
      +1

      Most likely what will happen, use parents account. If anyone thinks kids are going to give up YouTube because the gov said so? LOL Nope.

      It would also mean the end of viewing a lot of these sites without being signed in, as there is no way to verify the viewer is 16 or over.

      • noideaa on 11/11/2024 - 11:21
        +1

        Which is concering because they will be thinking all those search history and interactions are from parents who didn’t have a thought about that and went “sure son, do what you like”.

  • Untameable on 11/11/2024 - 01:25

    I always vote Labor. The LNP are crooks.

    But I’ll vote LNP out of spite this election. Labor has done nothing during the cost of living crisis and the Israel war and now this?

    Screw it.

    • JimmyF on 11/11/2024 - 09:15
      +1

      Sadly both sides support this, so it won't matter who wins.

      Which if you think about it, when have Labour and LNP agreed on anything!? This fact alone should make everyone very worried about the real reasons behind this.

      hint it isn't about protecting the kids! I don't seen porn sites being blocked? If we're protecting the kids, surely this is higher on the list than blocking YouTube!

    • morse on 12/11/2024 - 06:21

      This doesn’t seem like the smartest move if you’re someone who is impacted by cost of living increases. Do you really think LNP will help? Most LNP members will have shares in major supermarkets and investment properties that they are claiming depreciation on if not also negative gearing.

      If you’re not a fan of Israel, Dutton is definitely not your man, Labor may be too tolerant or Israel’s actions, Dutton actively supports them.

      Sure you and other voters can send a message, but if you end up with LNP in, you’ll end up worse off.

      Other ways to send a message:
      - vote for another party first then preference Labor
      - meet with your local member to raise your concerns
      - write to government to raise your concerns
      - activism

  • qaz182 on 11/11/2024 - 04:50
    +6

    To be blunt, the ONLY reliable way to combat dis/misinformation is freedom of speech.

    Anything else is censorship and will inevitably be abused by those pulling the strings to manipulate their "lessors"

    This is the case for left, right, centre, communist, nazi, socialist, everybody. Censorship will end up being used against you.

    • JimmyF on 11/11/2024 - 09:19
      +1

      Agreed, once you start to censorship those in control of the content shape the views of those viewing it.

      It's funny, if you don't agree with something it is classed as a 'conspiracy theory', but if you agree with it, then it's not longer a conspiracy theory, but something true!

      I'm disappointed at Australia, yet again.

  • interlocal on 11/11/2024 - 11:32
    +1

    So, re Digital ID requirement…
    What stops the kid from choosing, say, "USA" from the dropdown instead of "Australia" during registration and bypassing the ID check?
    Facebook etc would definitely close their eyes on that as they care about the number of their userbase, and the AU government cannot realistically force them to check every user in the world if they are on Australian soil.

    I expect it would be "we did a great job of protecting our children with this world-first law, so Meta, Google, etc agreed to include a button "report this user as he's <16" and use very intelligent AI (no one knows how it works or if it even works) to flag posts/videos that are likely made by kids" or something like that.

    • JimmyF on 11/11/2024 - 11:56
      +1

      What stops the kid from choosing, say, "USA" from the dropdown instead of "Australia" during registration and bypassing the ID check?

      If they VPN into the USA (or any other country other than Australia or China) they can do that for sure!

      There is talk that anyone accessing these services from within Australia will need to be signed in regardless of their 'home' country setting, so will have to have their age verified. So basically tourists too, as soon as they hit Australian internet access providers, they'll be prompted to 'verify' their age to use the service. Have listen to this, 'everyone' is going to be verified. https://x.com/FetchStep/status/1855463809160216751

      Its a joke and the more you understand what they are proposing, the more you see this is less about the children, and more about watching and controlling the adults.

      If they really cared about the children, then porn sites should have to verify people are over 18!

      So little 10/11/12/13/14/15yo Jimmy who can't watch YouTube, can't be on messenger to talk to his friend, can browse to the porn sites and wack himself silly over 18+ content!

      Now that is farked up.

      • interlocal on 11/11/2024 - 12:31

        So, that could be circumvented in 5 minutes with near 0 technical knowledge, like any Netflix/Spotify/etc. geopricing workarounds we see here on OzB. And as it's not geopricing, those measures are not bringing any revenue to tech companies; they would not do anything with those workarounds.

        No one in government is caring about children/porn/whatever; they care about being re-elected, that's all. Introducing a law "you need ID to post on the internet" that is easily circumvented would not win you any elections, as "think about the children" could win over voices of some parents, but requiring ID to post things on the internet would lose you the voice of most internet users, which is a much greater number.

        • JimmyF on 11/11/2024 - 14:26

          So, that could be circumvented in 5 minutes with near 0 technical knowledge

          Basically, as long as the user connects via VPN to access these services they shouldn't be prompted to verify age.

          No one in government is caring about children/porn/whatever

          Yep, as they haven't gone after kids watching porn via the major sites, but YouTube!! OMG Youtube is the devil or messenger or Facebook.

          I don't disagree with more parental controls being added to these services for sure, but a blank ban isn't the answer. There is more to this at play!

          they care about being re-elected

          Considering both sides support this, we're kinda screwed. Which is odd in itself, since when have both major parties agreed on something!

  • DontNeedThis on 11/11/2024 - 13:54
    +3

    They should ban it for anyone under 75.

  • lachhelix on 11/11/2024 - 14:20

    Hahaha, yeah good luck with that 😂 way to alienate relationships

  • foursaken on 11/11/2024 - 14:36
    +2

    Really sick of seeing time and money devoted to bringing up the children of shit parents. Spend the time and money making parents better, not this waste. This is an utter brain fart and Albo sold it like dogshit on toast. At least I could see the point of a DNS blocklist.

    Social media is a bin fire, but at least it keeps those of us who barely scrape into the multicellular life category happy.

    Sorry Labor, you've lost me with this weak, snivelling garbage .You were exactly as disappointing as I expected you to be until this point. I'm going to vote for Matt Campervan.

  • BartholemewH on 11/11/2024 - 16:15
    +2

    "Why don't they just shove a leash up my ass"
    - Sly Stallone.

  • PerthMan96 on 11/11/2024 - 18:00
    -3

    1. I support it

    2. I support them banning more things (porn websites for example) if under 16 if possible

    3. i wish i had the same law in place when i was under 16. you only need a nokia 1-9 phone until your 16. Give your child a smart phone before 16 and you will raise someone who will be more brainwashed then someone who watches MSM

  • Roe Jogan on 11/11/2024 - 21:47
    +3

    it will never work, kids know what a VPN is and plenty of free ones too so they dont have to pay for it

    • Cluster on 12/11/2024 - 11:22

      Most of us have been tech savvy kids, and we know what we did to get around parent and school rules. Kids who really want something will be VERY creative in getting around the new rules.

    • DRAGON6UK on 29/11/2024 - 15:36

      Kids won't want to be on there , if other kids are not , it will all hold up very well . Facebook and x are a shitshow anyway , it's good kids won't be social engineered until later in life

  • Cluster on 12/11/2024 - 11:21
    +3

    This is a rather convenient way to link everyone's real world identity to their online accounts. People supporting this as a 'but what about the children!' move need to think carefully about the ramifications.

  • CaptainJack on 12/11/2024 - 12:20

    People who think their kids need to get better at parenting.

  • mlakmlak on 12/11/2024 - 18:04

    The Content Classification system (G, PG, M, MA) in Australia is well established for broadcasting, movies & games - it'd take 2mins & a lot less dollarbucks to modernise the definition & expand this to Social Media platforms.

    • DMFD on 12/11/2024 - 18:51

      A little too established

  • trapper on 14/11/2024 - 19:18
    +1

    It's never going to work anyway.

    Australia will have to block half the internet as most of these companies are going to ignore this completely.

  • mrdean on 21/11/2024 - 18:33
    +1

    Our benevolent & ethical government have graced the public with one day to lodge submissions for or against proposed amendments to the Online Safety Act 2021 that will attempt to block those under the age restriction from accessing social media.

    In order to implement this, it seems that everyone <edit - removed> may be required to prove either their identity or age to access certain social media platforms.

    Seeing as Parliament is currently in session, the government are apparently trying to get this & other bills through as quickly as possible.

    Note that the Online Safety Act is only 3 years old. It is a classic example of legislative "creep". What may have been well intentioned to start with (although I believe it wasn't), ends up amended to increase restrictions.

    The current landing page for information is here: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Sen…

    A submission can be made by simply emailing the Committee Secretariat at

    [email protected]

    The "ec" stands for Environment & Communications.

    The closing date for submission is tomorrow, Friday the 22nd of November 2024.

    If you do send in a submission, please be respectful.

  • SBOB on 22/11/2024 - 07:41

    As part of the legislation info:

    Age assurance trial
    The Government provided funding in the in the 2024-25 Budget to conduct a broad, three-phase trial of age assurance, including an assessment of technologies, to examine options to protect children from harmful online content, including on social media, and age-restricted content such as pornography

    So, rather than waiting for this 'trial' to conclude and prove that actual age verification via things like "ai" isn't accurate enough, let's just throw some legislation at the wall, give it a 12 mth window for 'working out how it would actually even be implemented', and ensure that every social media implements it differently.

    Of all the pearl clutching, won't someone thinks of the children, how can you oppose protecting children right before an election type legislations, this one is definitely up there :)

  • DRAGON6UK on 29/11/2024 - 15:35

    Age limit should be 21. Things like discord should not be included though , just the one that social engineer people . X , Facebook, Instagram , tiktok etc

  • CtrlAltSpoods on 29/11/2024 - 17:25

    If Discord is banned then kids will set up and probably even DEVELOP self-hosted alternatives..

    Mastodon could potentially take off now considering it's decentralized.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join