Australian Senate Debates World’s First Social Media Ban for Children Under 16

The Australian Senate was debating a ban on children younger than 16 years old from social media on Thursday after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly supported the age restriction. The bill would make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts. It is likely to be passed by the Senate on Thursday, the Parliament’s final session for the year and potentially the last before elections, which are due within months.

The major parties’ support for the ban all but guarantees the legislation will become law. But many child welfare and mental health advocates are concerned about unintended consequences.

Read more: Australia Nears Social Media Ban for Children After Heated Debate

Unaligned Sen. Jacqui Lambie complained about the limited amount of time the government gave the Senate to debate the age restriction, which she described as “undercooked.” "I thought this was a good idea, I think a lot of people out there thought it was a good idea until we looked at the detail and, let's be honest, there's no detail," Lambie told the Senate.

Opposition Sen. Maria Kovacic said the bill was not radical but necessary. "The core focus of this legislation is simple: It demands that social media companies take reasonable steps to identify and remove underage users from their platforms," Kovacic told the Senate. "This is a responsibility these companies should have been fulfilling long ago, but for too long they have shirked these responsibilities in favour of profit," she added.

Australian Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young described the ban as “rubbish.” "Trying to fool the Australian population that they are doing this in the interest of children is abhorrent. They’re not. They’re doing it in their own political interest. This is a political fix, not a social media fix," she said.

Read more: Social Media Laws: How the World Has Tightened Norms

The House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly carried the bill 102 votes to 13. Once the legislation becomes law, the platforms would have one year to work out how they could implement the ban before penalties are enforced.

The platforms complained that the law would be unworkable, and urged the Senate to delay the vote until at least June next year when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies made its report on how young children could be excluded.

Critics argue the government is attempting to convince parents it is protecting their children ahead of general elections due by May.

Read more: Could Australia's ban on social media for kids set an example?

The government hopes that voters will reward it for responding to parents' concerns about their children's addiction to social media. Some argue the legislation could cause more harm than it prevents. Criticisms include that the legislation was rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, is ineffective, poses privacy risks for all users, and undermines parental authority to make decisions for their children.

Opponents of the bill also argue the ban would isolate children, deprive them of the positive aspects of social media, drive them to the dark web, discourage children too young for social media to report harm and reduce incentives for platforms to improve online safety.