91������̳

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s new social media ban for young people may appeal to worried parents, but it doesn’t address the real problems with social media platforms.

Labor, with the support of the Coalition, passed the on November 27 banning social media platforms for under 16-year-olds. It will take effect in the next 12 months.

Albanese claimed he wanted kids “off their devices and onto the footy fields, swimming pools and tennis courts”. He repeated that the ban meant “parents can have a different discussion with their young ones” — reinforcing the illusion that the new law will keep young people safe. 

Although social media bans have been imposed in countries such as and , Australia has set the highest minimum age of 16-years-old, a world first. 

France’s ban prevents under 15-year-olds from accessing social media, while Norway has an age limit of 13. Despite this, more than half of 9-year-olds, 58% of 10-year olds and 72% of 11-year-olds are on social media according to the .

French education minister Anne Genetet is pushing for the European Union (EU) to “follow the example of Australia” and implement EU-wide bans. 

Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, X and TikTok all fall under the ban. YouTube is supposedly exempt, although it released a statement to creators saying it was unclear how the ban would impact the video streaming site.

Albanese is tapping into popular concerns about social media. A found that 77% backed the ban, an increase from August when 61% were in favour. 

The proposal received major support from parent groups and the Australian Primary Principals Association but was opposed by mental health organisations including (SPA).

The Australian Greens voted against the proposal, as did eight independents. Liberal MP Bridget Archer voted against the bill in the lower house and two Coalition Senators voted against the bill in the Senate. 

Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, Greens spokesperson for communications, the bill “might make oldies feel like they’ve done something, but in reality it only delivers a false sense of security”.

“Young people will be pushed to darker spaces on the web and regional, marginalised and vulnerable kids will be further isolated.”

The usual consultation and scrutiny was skipped as Labor pushed to pass the bill before the last sitting day of parliament. 

This quick turnaround meant that concerns about how privacy and personal information will be handled have been left unanswered. 

SPA executive director Christopher Stone said the government is “running blindfolded into a brick wall by rushing this legislation”. 

“[Labor] has bypassed the rigorous consultation and scrutiny needed for such a far-reaching decision. Young Australians deserve evidence-based policies, not decisions made in haste.” 

Albanese ruled out implementing a “Digital ID” for social media. He told a November 28 press conference that social media platforms would now have a “social responsibility” to ensure the safety of children online. 

However little has been done to pressure big tech companies to remove dangerous content from these platforms.

Instead of tackling the predatory algorithms, data harvesting and graphic content circulated by social media giants, the bill simply restricts young people’s access to information and communication. 

The drive to boost engagement has led to more graphic and controversial content being promoted by algorithms. These algorithms also aim to keep people scrolling, spending more time on the platform and providing valuable data that can be sold to marketing companies and others.

While big corporations pretend they are “unable” to prevent dangerous content from appearing on young people’s feeds, there is a lot they could do. 

Hanson-Young said Labor should have addressed “the dangerous and predatory business models of the tech giants”. 

“Parents are rightly concerned and we all agree something needs to be done to make tech platforms safer, but this was not the way to do it.”

Labor claims the ban is aimed at reducing anxiety and depression in young people. Negative body image, jealousy and cyberbullying were all raised as factors contributing to declining mental health. 

However, “this legislation fails to consider the positive aspects of social media in supporting young people’s mental health and sense of connection”, Stone said.

The statistics show that much of young people’s declining mental health is caused by such as the cost-of-living crisis, housing insecurity and fears about the climate emergency, much of which can be sheeted home to government policies.

According to Mental Health Australia, more than 50% of people say that the cost-of-living is having a big impact on their mental health and young people are feeling the effects too.

Banning social media means destroying the online communities and connections that young people have been able to develop.

A found that more than 60% of teenagers use social media to access news.

Leonardo Pugilisi, a 17-year-old journalist with the youth-run 6News the ban would prevent young people from accessing information but would not stop them accessing harmful content.

While it is still unclear how the ban will be enforced, it is likely that tech-savvy young people will find ways around it. 

[Luka Koerber is a high school student.]