Australia will ban children under 16 from using social media after its senate approved what will become a world-first law.
It is a move the Australian government argues is necessary to protect the mental health and wellbeing of children. The legislation does not specify which platforms will be banned as these decisions will be made later – but communications minister Michelle Rowland has previously said that TikTok, X, Instagram, Snapchat, Reddit and Facebook are likely to be part of the ban.
The law will impose fines of up to AU$50m (£26m) on platforms for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts. Gaming and messenger platforms are exempt, as are websites that can be accessed without an account, which should mean YouTube is unaffected.
The ban will take effect a year after the bill becomes law, allowing platforms time to work out technological solutions that would also protect users’ privacy. A trial of methods to enforce it will start in January.
The Senate passed the bill by 34 votes to 19, after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved the legislation by 102 votes to 13 on Wednesday. It now goes back to the lower house – where the government has a majority – to approve amendments, before becoming law.
“This is a global problem and we want young Australians essentially to have a childhood,” prime minister Anthony Albanese said when introducing the bill last week. “We want parents to have peace of mind.”
The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 sets Australia up as a test case for a growing number of governments which have legislated, or have said they plan to legislate, an age restriction on social media. Countries including France and some US states have passed laws to restrict access for children without parental permission, but the Australian ban is absolute. A full under-14s ban in Florida is being challenged in court on free speech grounds.
Getting the law passed after a marathon last day of Australia’s parliamentary year marks a political win for centre-left Mr Albanese, who goes into next year’s election low in the opinion polls.
The ban faced opposition from privacy advocates and some child rights groups, but 77 per cent of the population wanted it, according to the latest poll from YouGov released this week. That was up from 61 per cent in August.
Wayne Holdsworth, whose teenage son Mac took his own life after falling victim to an online sextortion scam, had advocated for the age restriction and took pride in its passage.
“I have always been a proud Australian, but for me subsequent to today’s Senate decision, I am bursting with pride,” Mr Holdsworth told the Associated Press.
Critics of the legislation have said it was rushed through parliament without adequate scrutiny. They argue the law will not work and would take away parents’ authority to decide what’s best for their children. It may also cause isolation among children and deprive them of the positive aspects of social media, such as keeping up with their friends.
Last month, more than 140 Australian and international academics with expertise in fields related to technology and child welfare signed an open letter to the prime minister opposing a social media age limit as “too blunt an instrument to address risks effectively”.
Jackie Hallan, a director at the youth mental health service ReachOut, opposed the ban. She said 73 per cent of young people across Australia accessing mental health support did so through social media. However, Mr Albanese has said there would be exclusions and exemptions in circumstances, such as a need to continue access to educational services.
Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, said the legislation was “inconsistent with what Australian parents have told us that they want, which is a simple and effective way for them to set controls and manage their teens’ online experience”.
“It’s cart before horse,” Sunita Bose, managing director of Digital Industry Group, which has most social media companies as members, told Reuters. “We have the bill but we don’t have guidance from the Australian government around what are the right methods that a whole host of services subject to this law will need to employ.”
Reuters contributed to this report