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.

Romania plans TikTok suspension over election concerns

Romania‘s telecoms regulator is set to initiate steps to suspend TikTok, citing potential interference in the recent presidential election. Pavel Popescu, the regulator’s deputy head, announced plans to begin the suspension process on Thursday. The action will remain in place until state authorities conclude their investigation into allegations of electoral manipulation linked to the platform.

The scrutiny comes after TikTok‘s role in Sunday’s election raised concerns about misinformation and influence. Officials are prioritising transparency and security during the ongoing electoral process.

The decision underscores the increasing global attention on social media platforms’ influence on democratic processes.

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.

Social media fine plan dropped in Australia

Australia’s government has abandoned a proposal to fine social media platforms up to 5% of their global revenue for failing to curb online misinformation. The decision follows resistance from various political parties, making the legislation unlikely to pass the Senate.

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland stated the proposal aimed to enhance transparency and hold tech companies accountable for limiting harmful misinformation online. Despite broad public support for tackling misinformation, opposition from conservative and crossbench politicians stalled the plan.

The centre-left Labor government, currently lagging in polls, faces criticism for its approach. Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young described the proposed law as a ‘half-baked option,’ adding to calls for more robust measures against misinformation.

Industry group DIGI, including Meta, argued the proposal merely reinforced an existing code. Australia’s tech regulation efforts are part of broader concerns about foreign platforms undermining national sovereignty.

TikTok CEO turns to Elon Musk for guidance

TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew recently sought advice from Elon Musk regarding matters tied to the upcoming US administration, according to reports. Chew engaged Musk in discussions about potential policies and their impact on the tech industry.

No specific actions to ensure TikTok’s operations in the US have been confirmed, though ByteDance leadership remains optimistic about maintaining its presence. Reports suggest the company has kept senior executives informed of the talks while exploring various strategic options.

ByteDance reportedly engaged with figures connected to both Trump and Kamala Harris before the US elections to gauge perspectives. These efforts reflect a cautious approach to navigating potential shifts in policy.

Trump, who unsuccessfully attempted to ban TikTok in 2020, has stated he would not support barring the platform if re-elected. The evolving political landscape underscores the stakes for ByteDance and its flagship app in the US.

Elon Musk criticises Australia’s plan to ban social media for kids

Elon Musk has spoken out against Australia’s proposed law to ban social media use for children under 16, calling it a “backdoor way to control access to the Internet by all Australians.” The legislation, introduced by Australia’s centre-left government, includes fines of up to A$49.5 million ($32 million) for systemic breaches by platforms and aims to enforce an age-verification system.

Australia’s plan is among the world’s strictest, banning underage access without exceptions for parental consent or existing accounts. By contrast, countries like France and the US allow limited access for minors with parental approval or data protections for children. Critics argue Australia’s proposal could set a precedent for tougher global controls.

Musk, who has previously clashed with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government, is a vocal advocate for free speech. His platform, X, has faced tensions with Australia, including a legal challenge to content regulation orders earlier this year. Albanese has called Musk an “arrogant billionaire,” underscoring their rocky relationship.

Brendan Carr to lead FCC in Trump’s push for deregulation

President-elect Donald Trump has nominated Brendan Carr to lead the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Carr, an FCC commissioner since 2017, is a familiar figure within the administration and has aligned his policy views with Trump’s conservative agenda, particularly concerning free speech and deregulation. Often criticising tech giants like Alphabet and Meta, accusing them of stifling conservative voices, he has called for revisiting Section 230, which shields platforms from liability over user content. Carr advocates for changes to ensure anti-discrimination norms apply to tech firms and supports laws similar to those in Texas and Florida, enforcing platforms to accept diverse viewpoints. The US Supreme Court, however, is cautious about potential First Amendment conflicts, preserving platforms’ rights to moderate content.

Carr’s proposals extend to involving tech companies in funding the Universal Service Fund, which supports communication infrastructure, arguing their financial involvement is justified. Historically, tech firms have resisted this initiative, citing their substantial investments in infrastructure. Additionally, Carr opposes net neutrality, viewing it as restrictive to innovation. His experience includes contributing to repealing net neutrality under previous FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, with Carr arguing that alleged negative impacts, such as increased costs, did not materialise.

Removing Chinese telecom tech from US networks on national security grounds is also part of Carr’s agenda, seeking additional funding to replace it due to security concerns. He also labels TikTok a national threat, though Trump has softened his stance.

One of Carr’s crucial policy stances is to improve rural internet access through technologies like Starlink’s low-Earth orbit satellites, considering them cost-effective solutions. His agenda pushes for a deregulatory approach, reducing local government and regulatory barriers in telecom infrastructure to encourage growth and innovation.

Carr’s tenure is anticipated to bolster free speech and minimise regulation, aligning with Trump’s advocacy. However, his policies will likely stir debate, especially around balancing constitutional rights and industry demands. This approach suggests a potentially transformative phase for the FCC, marked by contentious discussions over free speech, regulation, and innovation under Trump’s forthcoming presidency.