Australia has made global headlines by introducing the world’s strictest social media laws.
Parliament approved a ban preventing children under 16 from using platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat.
This controversial legislation, hailed by some as a necessary step, has sparked debates over privacy, enforcement, and its broader impact, according to BBC.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese defended the move. “We want our kids to have a childhood and parents to know we have their backs.”
The law aims to protect young people from the mental health risks of social media, including cyberbullying, addiction, and exposure to harmful content.
SOCIAL MEDIA AND PARENTS
Parent groups applauded the decision, calling it a relief.
Amy Friedlander, a parent advocate, said, “Parents have faced an impossible choice – letting their children feel left out or giving them an addictive device.”
HOW WILL THE SOCIAL MEDIA BAN WORK?
The law doesn’t come into effect immediately. The government has 12 months to prepare, according to Reuters.
Social media companies must introduce age verification systems to block underage users.
Non-compliance could lead to massive fines of up to A$50 million (R600 million). The eSafety Commissioner, Australia’s internet watchdog, will oversee enforcement.
SOCIAL MEDIA APPS THAT FALL UNDER THIS BAN
Platforms like Snapchat, TikTok, Facebook, and X will fall under the ban.
However, YouTube and gaming platforms are likely exempt, as they don’t always require accounts to access content.
Critics question whether the technology will work, according to the Washington Times.
Digital experts argue that children could easily bypass the ban using virtual private networks (VPNs). Others worry about how companies will verify users’ ages without breaching privacy.
CONCERNS OVER EFFECTIVENESS
The legislation has drawn backlash from various corners.
Social media companies, including Google, Meta, and TikTok, criticised the lack of clarity.
TikTok called the rules “broad and unclear,” while X raised concerns over compatibility with international human rights laws.
Experts argue that banning social media is a blunt instrument.
EXCLUDING YOUNG VOICES
Youth advocates have also criticised the government for excluding young voices from the debate.
The eSafety Youth Council said, “We understand the risks of social media, but we need to be part of the solution.”
Many worry the ban could drive young users to unregulated corners of the internet, creating new safety risks.
A similar French law requiring parental consent for under-15 users has seen limited success, with many children bypassing restrictions.
GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS
Australia’s move has inspired other countries to consider similar bans.
Norway is reportedly drafting comparable legislation. In the UK, the technology secretary suggested a ban could be “on the table” in future.
SOCIAL MEDIA IN SOUTH AFRICA
In South Africa, the debate over social media safety is also gaining momentum.
Local organisations, such as Child Welfare SA, have called for tighter regulations on platforms targeting children.
However, critics argue that enforcement in South Africa could face challenges, especially with high internet penetration and limited digital literacy among parents.
A STEP FORWARD OR A MISSTEP?
While Australia’s social media ban is bold, its success hinges on effective enforcement and technological innovation.
Whether it inspires a global wave of similar laws remains to be seen.
Albanese acknowledged the complexity of the issue, comparing the law to alcohol bans for minors. He admitted it wouldn’t be perfect but insisted, “We know it’s the right thing to do.”
For South Africans, the developments offer lessons in balancing child safety and digital freedom.
DO YOU THINK BANNING SOCIAL MEDIA FOR UNDER-16S IS THE RIGHT APPROACH?
Let us know by clicking on the comment tab below this article or by emailing info@thesouthafrican.com or sending a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1.
You can also follow @TheSAnews on X and The South African on Facebook for the latest news.
