Child safety online

Australia begins trial of teen social media ban

Australia‘s government is conducting a world-first trial to enforce its national social media ban for children under 16, focusing on age-checking technology. The trial, set to begin in January and run through March, will involve around 1,200 randomly selected Australians. It will help guide the development of effective age verification methods, as platforms like Meta, X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and Snapchat must prove they are taking ‘reasonable steps’ to keep minors off their services or face fines of up to A$49.5 million ($32 million).

The trial is overseen by the Age Check Certification Scheme and will test several age-checking techniques, such as video selfies, document uploads for verification, and email cross-checking. Although platforms like YouTube are exempt, the trial is seen as a crucial step for setting a global precedent for online age restrictions, which many countries are now considering due to concerns about youth mental health and privacy.

The trial’s outcomes could influence how other nations approach enforcing age restrictions, despite concerns from some lawmakers and tech companies about privacy violations and free speech. The government has responded by ensuring that no personal data will be required without alternatives. The age-check process could significantly shape global efforts to regulate social media access for children in the coming years.

Transparency issues plague UK mobile games

A recent investigation revealed that most top-selling mobile games in the UK fail to disclose the presence of loot boxes in their advertisements, despite regulations mandating transparency. Loot boxes, which provide randomised in-game items often obtained through payments, have drawn criticism for fostering addictive behaviors and targeting vulnerable groups, including children. Of the top 45 highest-grossing games analysed on Google Play, only two clearly mentioned loot boxes in their advertisements.

The UK Advertising Standards Authority, which oversees compliance, acknowledges the issue and promises further action but has faced criticism for its slow and limited enforcement. Critics argue that lax self-regulation within the gaming industry enables companies to prioritise profits over player well-being, particularly as loot boxes reportedly generate $15B annually.

Advocacy groups and researchers have voiced alarm over these findings, warning of long-term consequences. Zoë Osmond of GambleAware emphasised the risks of exposing children to gambling-like features in games, which could lead to harmful habits later in life. The gaming industry has so far resisted stricter government intervention, despite mounting evidence of non-compliance and harm.

Australian social media ban sparked by politician’s wife’s call to action

Australia has passed a landmark law banning children under 16 from using social media, following a fast-moving push led by South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas. The law, which takes effect in November 2025, aims to protect young people from the harmful effects of social media, including mental health issues linked to cyberbullying and body image problems. The bill has widespread support, with a government survey showing 77% of Australians backing the measure. However, it has sparked significant opposition from tech companies and privacy advocates, who argue that the law is rushed and could push young users to more dangerous parts of the internet.

The push for the national ban gained momentum after Malinauskas’s state-level initiative to restrict social media access for children under 14 in September. This led to a broader federal response, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government introducing a nationwide version of the policy. The legislation eliminates parental discretion, meaning no child under 16 will be able to use social media without facing fines for platforms that fail to enforce the rules. This move contrasts with policies in countries like France and Florida, where minors can access social media with parental permission.

While the law has garnered support from most of Australia’s political leaders, it has faced strong criticism from social media companies like Meta and TikTok. These platforms warn that the law could drive teens to hidden corners of the internet and that the rushed process leaves many questions unanswered. Despite the backlash, the law passed with bipartisan support, and a trial of age-verification technology will begin in January to prepare for its full implementation.

The debate over the law highlights growing concerns worldwide about the impact of social media on young people. Although some critics argue that the law is an overreach, others believe it is a necessary step to protect children from online harm. With the law now in place, Australia has set a precedent that could inspire other countries grappling with similar issues.

Australia’s new social media ban faces backlash from Big Tech

Australia’s new law banning children under 16 from using social media has sparked strong criticism from major tech companies. The law, passed late on Thursday, targets platforms like Meta’s Instagram and Facebook, as well as TikTok, imposing fines of up to A$49.5 million for allowing minors to log in. Tech giants, including TikTok and Meta, argue that the legislation was rushed through parliament without adequate consultation and could have harmful unintended consequences, such as driving young users to less visible, more dangerous parts of the internet.

The law was introduced after a parliamentary inquiry into the harmful effects of social media on young people, with testimony from parents of children who had been bullied online. While the Australian government had warned tech companies about the impending legislation for months, the bill was fast-tracked in a chaotic final session of parliament. Critics, including Meta, have raised concerns about the lack of clear evidence linking social media to mental health issues and question the rushed process.

Despite the backlash, the law has strong political backing, and the government is set to begin a trial of enforcement methods in January, with the full ban expected to take effect by November 2025. Australia’s long-standing tensions with major US-based tech companies, including previous legislation requiring platforms to pay for news content, are also fueling the controversy. As the law moves forward, both industry representatives and lawmakers face challenges in determining how it will be practically implemented.

Mixed reactions as Australia bans social media for minors

Australia’s recent approval of a social media ban for children under 16 has sparked mixed reactions nationwide. While the government argues that the law sets a global benchmark for protecting youth from harmful online content, critics, including tech giants like TikTok, warn that it could push minors to darker corners of the internet. The law, which will fine platforms like Meta’s Facebook, Instagram and TikTok up to A$49.5 million if they fail to enforce it, takes effect one year after a trial period begins in January.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese emphasised the importance of protecting children’s physical and mental health, citing the harmful impact of social media on body image and misogynistic content. Despite widespread support—77% of Australians back the measure—many are divided. Some, like Sydney resident Francesca Sambas, approve of the ban, citing concerns over inappropriate content, while others, like Shon Klose, view it as an overreach that undermines democracy. Young people, however, expressed their intent to bypass the restrictions, with 11-year-old Emma Wakefield saying she would find ways to access social media secretly.

This ban positions Australia as the first country to impose such a strict regulation, ahead of other countries like France and several US states that have restrictions based on parental consent. The swift passage of the law, which was fast-tracked through parliament, has drawn criticism from social media companies, which argue the law was rushed and lacked proper scrutiny. TikTok, in particular, warned that the law could worsen risks to children rather than protect them.

The move has also raised concerns about Australia’s relationship with the United States, as figures like Elon Musk have criticised the law as a potential overreach. However, Albanese defended the law, drawing parallels to age-based restrictions on alcohol, and reassured parents that while enforcement may not be perfect, it’s a necessary step to protect children online.

Australia enacts groundbreaking law banning under-16s from social media

Australia has approved a groundbreaking law banning children under 16 from accessing social media, following a contentious debate. The new regulation targets major tech companies like Meta, TikTok, and Snapchat, which will face fines of up to A$49.5 million if they allow minors to log in. Starting with a trial period in January, the law is set to take full effect in 2025. The move comes amid growing global concerns about the mental health impact of social media on young people, with several countries considering similar restrictions.

The law, which marks a significant political win for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, has received widespread public support, with 77% of Australians backing the ban. However, it has faced opposition from privacy advocates, child rights groups, and social media companies, which argue the law was rushed through without adequate consultation. Critics also warn that it could inadvertently harm vulnerable groups, such as LGBTQIA or migrant teens, by cutting them off from supportive online communities.

Despite the backlash, many parents and mental health advocates support the ban, citing concerns about social media’s role in exacerbating youth mental health issues. High-profile campaigns and testimonies from parents of children affected by cyberbullying have helped drive public sentiment in favour of the law. However, some experts warn the ban could have unintended consequences, pushing young people toward more dangerous corners of the internet where they can avoid detection.

The law also has the potential to strain relations between Australia and the United States, as tech companies with major US ties, including Meta and X, have voiced concerns about its implications for internet freedom. While these companies have pledged to comply, there remain significant questions about how the law will be enforced and whether it can achieve its intended goals without infringing on privacy or digital rights.

UK social media platforms criticised over safety failures

Nearly a quarter of children aged 8-17 in the UK lie about their age to access adult social media platforms, according to a new Ofcom report. The media regulator criticised current verification processes as insufficient and warned tech companies they face heavy fines if they fail to improve safety measures under the Online Safety Act, which takes effect in 2025.

The law will require platforms to implement ‘highly effective’ age assurance to prevent underage users from accessing adult content. Ofcom’s findings highlight the risks children face from harmful material online, sparking concerns from advocates like the Molly Rose Foundation, which warns that tech companies are not enforcing their own rules.

Some social media platforms, including TikTok, claim they are enhancing safety measures with machine learning and other innovations. However, BBC investigations and feedback from teenagers suggest that bypassing current systems remains alarmingly easy, with no ID verification required for account setup. Calls for stricter regulation continue as online safety concerns grow.

UNESCO survey finds many influencers don’t fact-check content

A new survey by UNESCO reveals that over 60% of online influencers fail to fact-check the content they share with their followers. The study, conducted by researchers at Bowling Green State University, surveyed 500 influencers across 45 countries about their content-sharing practices. It found that many influencers struggle to assess the reliability of information, with 42% relying on the number of likes and shares a post receives as a measure of credibility.

The survey also highlighted that only 37% of content creators use mainstream media as a source, with personal experiences and their own research being the top sources for content. While many influencers are aware of the challenge of misinformation, only 73% expressed interest in training to better handle disinformation and online hate speech.

UNESCO is responding to this need by launching a month-long training program designed to equip influencers with tools to combat disinformation. The course will teach content creators how to verify information, source from diverse outlets, and debunk false narratives, aiming to improve the overall quality of online information.

Australian parliament advances social media restrictions for kids

Australia’s House of Representatives passed a groundbreaking bill on Wednesday aiming to ban social media use for children under 16. The bill, supported by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Labor government and the opposition, introduces strict measures requiring platforms to implement age-verification systems. Companies could face fines of up to A$49.5 million ($32 million) for breaches. The Senate will debate the bill next, with Albanese pushing for its approval before the year ends.

The law follows an emotional inquiry that highlighted cyberbullying’s devastating effects, including testimony from parents of children who self-harmed. While advocates argue the ban will protect young people’s mental health, critics, including youth groups and human rights organisations, warn it risks cutting off teens from vital social connections. Tech giants like Google, Meta, and TikTok have urged the government to delay the legislation until a proposed age-verification trial concludes in 2025.

Despite these concerns, public opinion overwhelmingly supports the ban, with recent polls showing 77% approval. Parent advocacy groups have praised the initiative as a critical step in addressing the negative impacts of social media on children. However, critics within parliament and civil rights groups have called for more nuanced solutions, emphasising the importance of balancing protection with privacy and self-expression rights.

If passed, Australia will become a global leader in stringent social media regulations, but the debate over how best to safeguard young users while respecting their freedoms is far from over.

Tech giants push back against Australia’s social media ban for children

Google and Meta are urging the Australian government to delay a proposed law that would prohibit social media use for children under 16, citing insufficient time to evaluate its potential effects. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government aims to pass the bill, which includes some of the strictest child social media controls globally, before the parliamentary year ends on Thursday. However, critics argue the rushed timeline undermines thorough debate and expert input.

The bill mandates social media platforms, not parents or children, to implement age-verification systems, potentially involving biometrics or government IDs. Platforms failing to comply could face fines of up to AUD 49.5 million ($32 million). While the Liberal opposition is likely to support the legislation, some independents and tech companies like TikTok and Elon Musk’s X have raised concerns about its clarity and impact on human rights, including freedom of expression and access to information.

Tech companies argue the government should wait for the results of an age-verification trial before proceeding. TikTok called the bill rushed and poorly consulted, while Meta described it as “inconsistent and ineffective.” Meanwhile, Elon Musk criticised the bill as a potential tool for broader internet control, amplifying debates over balancing child safety with digital freedoms.

As a Senate committee prepares a report on the legislation, the controversy underscores the global challenge of regulating children’s online activity without infringing on broader rights.