Too young for the feed?
This article was originally published in German. The English version is an automatic translation and may contain errors. The German original is authoritative.
Australia is sending a signal against cyberbullying, violence and harmful content. With a radical social media ban for under-16s, the country is taking a step that no other country has dared to take before. But the law is not meeting with universal approval. How far should safety go?
Social media is a fixed part of my everyday life; participation in youth and internet culture associated with it is now indispensable. But it's not just me — increasingly more children and young people are passive but also active users on apps like Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat. But when is young too young? Two weeks ago, Australia became the first country to decide that this limit is 16 and passed a new law.
Law for a safe internet?
The "Online Safety Act 2021", which, as the name already suggests, has existed since 2021, aims to increase safety on the internet and to increasingly make internet companies and social media platforms responsible for this safety. It is intended to protect against harmful content, such as cyberbullying, sexual harassment or calls to violence. However, the probably largest reform that the "Online Safety Act 2021" undergoes in 2024 is the enforced age verification and, connected with this, the strict social media ban for young people under 16 years of age in Australia.
The age verification systems just mentioned are to be tested and introduced within one year, that is, by the end of 2025. These are not only intended to ensure that no one under 16 can open a new account, but also active users who are still under 16 years old at that time are affected. The platforms themselves are responsible for this, and if no action is taken, fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars are threatened.
Good approach, poor implementation?
As expected, companies like Meta or TikTok criticise the law, not only because they are responsible for its implementation, but also because concerns about data protection arise. Age verification requires the entry of sensitive and personal data and/or images. The resulting collected database would be a popular target for hackers.
Doubts about the law also arise regarding freedom of expression, because social media is not only a place of entertainment but also of exchange of opinions and opinion formation, according to Amnesty International. The exclusion of young people from digital spaces could simply mean that their voices can no longer be heard here either.
According to an internal analysis by Google, approximately 40% of Gen Z prefer TikTok and Instagram to obtain information about, for example, travel plans or similar things. The ban would thus also restrict this freedom of information. And this is not only for travel plans, but particularly in the political and social sphere this would be a problem.
Two further points, which are particularly criticised by young people themselves, are the restriction of creative self-expression and the impact of the planned law on marginalised groups. Social media platforms like Instagram or TikTok offer numerous opportunities to be creative and thus express themselves online through videos, photos, images or texts. This makes social media a place where young people can remain true to themselves. For example, for LGBTQ+ members, online is sometimes one of the few safe spaces that exists. A ban could now break up these important networks and isolate children and young people.
A ban thus protects, but could also unintentionally restrict and even endanger. Critics call for a balance between the rights of young people and their safety. Australia is thus not only a global pioneer, but also a guinea pig. Whether and when further countries will follow suit remains to be seen for now.