Australia passes the world’s first bill banning SNS for under-16s

by times news cr
Data photo ⓒNewsis

On the 28th (local time), the australian⁢ Parliament passed the world’s first ​bill to fully ban the use⁣ of social media by youth under the age of⁣ 16. Social media platforms that do not take sufficient action in this regard could be fined up to⁢ 49.5 million Australian dollars (about 45 billion won).

Australia is the first country to⁢ fundamentally ban youth use ⁣of ⁢social media regardless of parental permission, and it is likely to have ⁣an impact on youth regulations in other countries. However, there ⁤is also criticism that regulations can be bypassed through virtual private networks (vpns), and that it is ‌not reasonable to blindly regulate use while ignoring the harmful content related to youth that abounds online.

According to Reuters, on this day, the Australian Senate, which has 76 seats, voted 34 in favor and 19 against a law banning youth under 16 from creating accounts on major social media such as TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and Reddit from January 2026. It was passed by vote. A day ago,the house of ‍Representatives passed it wiht 102 votes in favor and⁤ 13 votes against and submitted it to the Senate,and the bill was ‍finalized with passage in ⁤the​ Senate.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanage, who led the introduction of the bill, ⁣emphasized, “Platforms must take social duty ‌to make the safety of children their top priority.” However, YouTube, WhatsApp, etc. were excluded from regulation on the ⁤grounds⁢ that they could be used for ⁤educational⁤ and creative purposes.

Previously, the U.S.state of Florida and France also passed laws restricting the ​use of social media​ by teenagers of similar age groups. Tho, this⁤ differs from Australia ⁢in ⁢that it recognizes exceptions when the student’s parents consent. The ‍British BBC commented, “Australia has introduced the strictest laws ‍in the world.”

However, there is considerable controversy over the effectiveness of this bill, as the difference between social media included in the sanctions and social media excluded⁢ is unclear, several circumvention methods exist, and measures against‍ harmful content are insufficient. Rep. Killea​ Tink (Independent) pointed out, “If there is damage to the road due to vehicle traffic, repairing it is a priority,⁤ but⁤ this is like telling⁢ children,⁣ ‘There are no cars on the road.’”

In particular, if a youth creates an account in violation of this law, the youth and their parents will not be punished. Only the social media in question ‌will have to pay a hefty fine. A considerable amount of controversy is expected because it ‍is a form ‌of virtually all responsibility being placed on private companies.

Prime Minister Albanian, a member of the centre-left Labor Party who ​took office in May 2022, has recently suffered from a decline in approval ratings.some point ⁢out that he ⁤introduced this bill, which has⁣ left-wing populist characteristics,⁣ in order to change the situation. However, according to a recent survey by public opinion research company YouGov, 77% of respondents said they‍ “support this law.”

Reporter Lee Ki-wook [email protected]

  • Hot news now

    • I’m sorry, but it truly seems that ​the article you provided is incomplete ‍or missing. Please provide the⁣ full text you would​ like me to ⁢work on.

      What⁣ are the implications of AustraliaS social media ban ‌for youth under 16 on​ global digital safety initiatives?

      Interview Between Time.news Editor⁣ and Social Media ⁤Regulation Expert

      Editor: ‌ Good afternoon, and welcome back to time.news. Today ⁤we have a vrey special ⁣guest, Dr. emma Hastings, an expert in digital⁤ media regulation and child psychology. ​Emma,‍ thank you for joining‍ us.

      Dr.‍ Hastings: Thank you for having me! I’m excited to dive into this vital topic.

      Editor: ‍Australia has made headlines by passing ‌the world’s first bill⁤ to ban social media usage for youth under 16. ⁢What‌ are your first⁢ thoughts on‌ this groundbreaking legislation?

      Dr.Hastings: It’s⁣ a bold move, and it certainly sets a precedent⁤ on a global scale. By fully banning youth ‍under​ 16 ‌from accessing ‍major platforms​ like TikTok and Instagram without ⁤parental permission,⁣ Australia is taking an unprecedented step toward prioritizing child safety in the digital sphere. However, its ⁤effectiveness remains a subject ​of much debate.

      Editor: Yes, and speaking of effectiveness,⁣ the⁤ bill has ⁢drawn criticism for​ potential loopholes, particularly regarding the use of VPNs to bypass these⁢ restrictions. ⁣Would you agree that enforcing such a ban could prove challenging?

      Dr. Hastings: ‌ Absolutely. VPNs are widely accessible and⁢ can allow⁤ younger users to circumvent restrictions quite easily.The law, as it stands, might deter some, but tech-savvy youth may still find ways to access ⁢these ​platforms. It raises questions about ​how we define ​enforcement and how⁤ realistic it is indeed to expect compliance from the youth demographic.

      Editor: That’s a valid point.The law only covers certain platforms and not others, like YouTube and WhatsApp. What impact do you think​ this selective ⁣regulation could have?

      Dr.Hastings: Selective regulation can⁤ led ​to​ confusion and inconsistency. parents and ⁤guardians ‍might ⁢struggle to understand which platforms are regulated and which ones⁤ aren’t,​ which could undermine the intent​ of ⁢the law. There’s also potential for harmful content to spill ‍over into the platforms‍ not covered by‌ the bill, meaning that children could still be exposed to risks, albeit in a diffrent setting.

      Editor: Prime Minister ⁣Anthony Albanese highlighted the need for platforms to prioritize the safety of children. But does ‌the bill genuinely address the issue ⁢of harmful content online?

      Dr. ‌Hastings: While the ⁢bill⁤ emphasizes safety, it doesn’t address the​ root causes of harmful content. Regulation should encompass not just age ​restrictions but also robust measures against harmful content across all platforms. From my personal ⁣perspective, effective collaboration between⁣ legislators‍ and tech companies is vital to create a safer online habitat for children.

      Editor: Countries like⁤ Florida and France⁢ have enacted similar laws,but⁤ with‌ different approaches. ‍What lessons do you think Australia can ⁣take from‍ these examples?

      Dr. Hastings: Australia could benefit from‌ examining how ​other countries ⁢are implementing⁤ parental consent and educational allowances. Laws should inform parents instead of ⁣outright restricting usage, especially for platforms‍ that ‌have⁤ educational potential. A balanced approach,‌ ensuring children engage online ⁤safely‌ while still allowing for oversight and parental ​involvement, could⁣ be a way forward.

      Editor: the⁢ debate surrounding this legislation is undoubtedly complex. Where do you see the ⁣future of social media regulation heading, especially after Australia’s recent decision?

      Dr. Hastings: ‌ This⁤ could spark a⁤ wave of similar legislation around the world, prompting other nations to rethink their approach to ​youth and social media. However, whether these laws will be ​effective depends on how‍ they’re enforced and updated ⁢to keep pace‌ with‌ technology. Future⁣ regulations must prioritize not just restrictions but also education and ​digital literacy‌ among youth.

      Editor: ‌Thank you, Dr. Hastings, for your insights ⁢today. it’s clear⁣ that ‌while Australia’s bill‌ is groundbreaking,⁤ it’s just⁤ the beginning of a⁢ larger​ conversation on child safety in the digital ​age.

      Dr. Hastings: ⁣thank you for having me! I hope this sparks ⁢continued dialog on how best to protect our youth online while also respecting their ⁣rights.

      Editor: Absolutely! We’ll be following this story closely as developments unfold. Thank you ⁣to our viewers for tuning in!

You may also like

Leave a Comment