TikTok and Meta Gear Up for Potential Social Media Ban in Australia -

Australia’s controversial new legislation banning individuals under the age of 16 from using social media represents one of the most significant crackdowns on platforms like Facebook and TikTok, as governments around the world search for ways to protect children from harmful content.

The sweeping ban, enacted late Thursday, introduces some of the strictest internet usage rules outside of China and other authoritarian regimes, potentially encouraging other countries to follow suit. From Florida and Texas to France and the UK, officials have either begun or are considering raising the age limits for social media access or enhancing content monitoring.

Central to this discussion are the alarming aspects of social media that can lead to tragic events. For example, there was a 16-year-old boy whose social media feed was saturated with videos of despair and death, who sadly ended his life by stepping in front of a train in Bayport, New York. Likewise, a 15-year-old Australian girl took her own life by hanging after suffering years of cyberbullying.

While there is considerable public support for the ban in Australia—77% according to a YouGov poll—it has elicited strong opposition from major tech companies. Key players like Meta Platforms Inc. argue that the regulations are either ineffective or poorly constructed, while X, under Elon Musk’s leadership, has questioned the legality of the ban, potentially setting the stage for a legal challenge. Experts worry about the unintended consequences of such a blanket prohibition.

The new law, set to take effect within the next year, places the onus on digital platforms like Snapchat, Instagram, and X to enforce the age restrictions, with penalties of up to A$50 million ($32 million) for violations. However, how these platforms will verify users’ ages remains uncertain, as the government has already dismissed the use of official identification like passports due to privacy concerns. Children who bypass these verification methods will not face penalties, nor will their parents.

This legislation also threatens to disrupt the business models of some of the world’s most valuable companies, as they face rising global opposition over issues associated with their platforms, including increasing mental health concerns, online scams, poor academic performance, and grooming. Successfully implementing this ban would cut off access to a significant demographic—millions of teenagers, highly coveted by advertisers and targeted for early engagement.

In a statement, Meta acknowledged that while it would comply with the new law, it expressed “concern about the rapid process behind the legislation, which did not adequately consider the evidence, existing industry measures for providing age-appropriate experiences, and the views of young people.”

Anthony Albanese Photographer: Rohan Thomson/Bloomberg

The World Health Organization (WHO) issued a grave warning in September following a study involving nearly 280,000 school-aged children across 44 countries, one of the largest studies on this topic. The WHO cautioned that problematic social media use could have lasting effects on adolescent development and overall health.

The Geneva-based organization called for “immediate and sustained action.”

This week’s proactive move from Australia, which imposes age restrictions irrespective of parental consent, sets a new standard.

“We want Australian children to enjoy their childhood,” Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stated during the introduction of the legislation last week. Social media platforms generally require users to be at least 13 years old.

Read More: Australia’s Social Media Ban for Under 16s to Become Law

However, the straightforward approach of Australia’s solution has highlighted the complexity of the underlying issue.

YouTube, categorized by the Australian government as a health and education platform, is exempt from the ban, despite the often toxic nature of its comment sections. Online gaming and messaging platforms, such as WhatsApp and Discord, are also excluded, even though they can be arenas for bullying and grooming.

A significant flaw of a ban targeting youth, according to Lisa Given, a professor of information sciences at RMIT University in Melbourne, is that it does not address the production of harmful content. She argues that platform owners should concentrate on disabling harmful algorithms that inundate social media users with unwanted content. Additionally, increasing investment in digital literacy for both children and parents is essential, as Given asserts.

“This legislation is fundamentally misguided,” she stated. “It offers a simplistic solution to a deeply complex problem. And why choose 16? It seems arbitrary.”

Almost all major social media companies, including TikTok, X, and Meta (the parent company of Facebook and Instagram), voiced their criticisms of the new law during a rushed Senate inquiry prior to the bill’s passage.

TikTok, owned by China’s ByteDance Ltd., described the legislation as “hastily constructed” and “impractical,” filled with “unresolved issues and concerns.”

Snap Inc., the parent company of Snapchat, noted that previous international attempts for broad and mandatory age verification have fallen short. X, formerly known as Twitter, expressed “serious concerns regarding the legality of the bill.”

Unicef, the UN agency focused on children’s welfare, has stated that Australia’s ban may drive young users towards more dangerous and unregulated areas of the internet. The law poses risks to children’s rights and could hinder their access to vital information necessary for their well-being, according to Unicef.

“Instead of banning children, we should hold social media companies accountable for creating age-appropriate, safe, and supportive online environments,” said Katie Maskiell, head of child rights policy and advocacy at Unicef Australia, in her submission to parliament.

Difficult decisions face elected officials worldwide. Many parents feel overwhelmed and frustrated and want to reduce their children’s screen time. Their calls for government intervention are amplified by heartbreaking instances of youth suicides linked to social media bullying or sextortion. However, tackling the stark dangers of social media is complicated without undermining its benefits.

“It is nearly impossible to be a teenager in most parts of the world without social media,” remarked Stephen Scheeler, former head of Facebook in Australia and New Zealand, in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “Managing that access from the perspectives of parents or the government is far from straightforward.”

Numerous other countries and U.S. states have attempted to restrict children’s access to social media, with limited success.

A bill in Florida that would restrict children under 14 from having social media accounts has faced legal obstacles, as have efforts in states like Arkansas and Ohio that would require minors to obtain parental consent for social media usage.

Norway is contemplating a minimum social media age of 15, citing data showing that many children under 13, the current threshold, still engage with popular platforms, according to recent reports by the Guardian and others.

Even if Australia’s ban proves challenging or unworkable, other countries are likely to initiate similar measures as concerns about social media’s impact on children grow, according to Simon Kemp, founder of Kepios Pte., a digital consulting firm specializing in online behavior analysis based in Singapore.

“I would be very surprised if we don’t see more of this,” Kemp commented.

France has renewed its efforts to prevent those under 15 from accessing social media, as reported by Politico this week. French Education Minister Anne Genetet, a trained medical doctor, indicated during a meeting of EU education and youth ministers that the EU should follow Australia’s initiative.

The UK’s Secretary of State for Science and Technology, Peter Kyle, has contacted the Australian government to learn more about the rationale behind its ban. Kyle expressed that he is open to the possibility of a future ban, though he emphasizes that any actions must be evidence-based.

Follow Moneyweb’s extensive finance and business news on WhatsApp here.