Pressmediaofindia
Related Articles
22-11-2024
CANBERRA: Albanese says the ban which will cover platforms such as X, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram is about protecting kids from the “harms” of social media.
“This is a global problem and we want young Australians essentially to have a childhood. We want parents to have peace of mind,” he said on Thursday.
The new legislation provides a “framework” for the ban but the 17-page document, which is expected to head to the Senate next week, is sparse on detail.
Instead, it will be up to the nation’s internet regulator, the eSafety Commissioner – to hash out how to implement and enforce the rules, which will not come into effect for at least 12 months after legislation is passed.
According to the bill, the ban will apply to all children under 16 and that there will be no exemptions for existing users or those with parental consent.
Tech companies will face penalties of up to AU$50m ($32.5m; £25.7) if they do not comply, but there will be exemptions for platforms which are able to create “low-risk services” deemed suitable for kids. Criteria for this threshold are yet to be set.
Messaging services and gaming sites, however, will not be restricted, as will some sites that can be accessed without an account like YouTube, which has prompted questions over how regulators will determine what is and isn’t a social media platform in a fast-moving landscape.
A group representing the interests of tech companies such as Meta, Snapchat and X in Australia has dismissed the ban as “a 20th Century response to 21st Century challenges”.
Such legislation could push kids into “dangerous, unregulated parts of the internet”, Digital Industry Group Inc says, a fear also expressed by some experts.
“I felt really scared to be honest,” says James, describing an incident on Snapchat that left him questioning whether it was safe to go to school.
The Australian boy, 12, had had a disagreement with a friend, and one night before bed the boy added him to a group chat with two older teenagers.
Almost instantly, his phone “started blowing up” with a string of violent messages.
“One of them sounded like he was probably 17,” James tells media. “He sent me videos of him with a machete… he was waving it around. Then there were voice messages saying that they were going to catch me and stab me.”
James, not his real name first joined Snapchat when he was 10, after a classmate suggested everyone in their friendship group get the app but after telling his parents about his cyberbullying experience, which was ultimately resolved by his school, James deleted his account.
His experience is a cautionary tale that shows why the Australian government’s proposed social media ban on children under 16 is necessary, says his mother Emma who is also using a pseudonym.
The laws, which were tabled in parliament’s lower house on Thursday, have been billed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as “world-leading” but while many parents have applauded the move, some experts have questioned whether kids should or even can be barred from accessing social media, and what the adverse effects of doing so may be.
eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has acknowledged the gargantuan task her office will face when enforcing the ban, given “technology change is always going to outpace policy”.
“It will always be fluid, and this is why regulators like eSafety have to be nimble,” she told media but Inman Grant has also raised concerns about the central idea behind the government’s policy, which is that there’s a causal link between social media and declining mental health. (Int’l Monitoring Desk)
