The Australian federal government said Tuesday it will introduce legislation this year to ban children from accessing social media. The exact age has not yet been determined.
The plan, announced by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, is in line with moves by other governments in the Asia-Pacific region to rein in online media and social media in particular.
Many in the region are concerned that social media platforms are causing addictive behaviour, enabling bullying, gambling and facilitating cybercrime. Albanese described the impact of social media on young people as a “scourge”.
Governments in Malaysia, Singapore and Pakistan have sought to take action against social media companies in recent months, though for different reasons and methods. This week, Malaysia halted its plan to reroute internet traffic and implement a “kill switch.”
Banning children from using social media has been official policy for both parties in the ruling coalition (the Australian Liberal Party and the Australian National Party) since June.
Albanese said the government is considering setting the minimum age from 14 to 16, and that he personally prefers 16 to be the minimum age at which access to sites like Instagram and TikTok is permitted.
The federal government is currently testing different methods of age verification and will decide on a minimum age once the testing is complete. It says it will develop legislation in conjunction with the country’s states to avoid different rules. South Australia, which includes Adelaide, has been the most active on the issue and recently proposed rules that would force social media companies to ban children under 13 from their sites.
“Evidence suggests that early access to addictive social media is causing harm to our children. [..] “This is no different than cigarettes or alcohol,” said South Australia Premier Peter Malinauskas.
Moves to control access to social media are sure to face opposition in some quarters on the grounds that such controls are likely to infringe on privacy. Social media providers are also unlikely to be happy with the additional costs and liability of monitoring sites, pages and posts.
Australia has previously enacted laws that platforms have not liked. The introduction of the News Media Bargaining Act, designed to force platforms to pay local news providers for their content, led to Facebook briefly pulling out of the country. Since then, the platforms have largely been able to bypass the law.
Australia’s regulators have not been easy to stand up to foreign tech companies. In April, the federal internet safety watchdog, known as the eSafety Commissioner, sought to remove video footage of a knife attack at a Sydney church that the government had classified as an act of terrorism. It sought an injunction against X (formerly Twitter) when the platform refused to block the footage outside Australia, but the court refused to extend the temporary ban.
X owner Elon Musk called the court ruling a victory for free speech and an open internet. “What’s stopping a country from taking over the entire internet?” Musk said on X. His stance angered Albanese, who accused Musk of “arrogance,” acting “above Australian law” and ignoring the country’s partisan stance.
In late August, the Malaysian government proposed an annual licensing system for social media companies with more than eight million users. The system would also impose criminal liability on service providers for user-generated content, impose strict content moderation requirements, and require prior approval from the Islamic Development Department for religious content.
In a country with a long history of censoring movies, television and other media for religious and political reasons, the policy has been opposed by those who fear the government will use the laws to silence critics. Those working in the country’s digital economy have also opposed the proposed redirection, and on Sunday the government backtracked.
“Taking into consideration the views expressed through the engagement sessions held by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, as well as from the general public, I have requested [the commission] “The implementation should not go ahead,” Telecommunications Minister Fahmi Fadil said late Sunday.
In Singapore, the Online Criminal Damage Act, passed by parliament last year, will require social media sites and messaging services to implement systems to detect fraud and malicious activity by the end of 2024. They will also have to submit annual reports to authorities and identify sellers deemed risky. Facebook and Carousel, a local marketplace, were responsible for 70% of reported e-commerce fraud, according to the Ministry of Home Affairs.
In Pakistan, national security grounds are being cited as a reason for potentially dramatic changes to internet access. But how far these measures have gone is unclear at this point.
In August, the government told parliament that it had installed a web management system, which allows local authorities to block content and monitor and control internet traffic “at the gateway level.”
The Internet and Wireless Service Providers Association quickly reported a noticeable slowdown in internet speeds. Many users complained that the WhatsApp instant messaging service, which is very popular for social and business purposes, was no longer available or unable to transfer documents, photos or voice notes.
The Pakistani government has repeatedly denied that it is installing a national firewall, similar to the one in China. The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority blamed internet slowdowns in August on problems with two undersea cables.
However, as in China, Pakistan now requires all users of virtual private networks (VPNs), which allow users to pass their communications through a secure, private channel and change their location online, to register.
Pakistan has also banned Musk's Project X since February this year.
