Australia’s age-check on social media

The ban is now in force against children younger than 16 per order of Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, reported to be a world-first social media restriction. It mandates tech giants to remove the accounts of young children or face fines of up to $33 million for non-compliance. Could such a landmark law be replicated in the Philippines?

The University of the Philippines Population Institute defines young adults as those between the ages 15 and 24, in the context of “sexuality, fertility, reproductive health, education, employment aspirations and trajectories, health and lifestyle, media use, mental health, as well as their attitudes on marriage, family formation, and norms, among others.” Likewise, a 2017 Philippine Statistics Authority survey showed that 196,478 young women ranging in age from 10 to 19 have experienced pregnancy. 

In the Internet of Things, everyone regardless of age or sex becomes vulnerable to all sorts of danger that various social media platforms may pose. The Australian template could be the best practice replicable in other jurisdictions once it has proved to bring about a positive impact like maybe a significant reduction in unwanted pregnancies, dysfunctional activities, even suicides. In short, it gives “greater peace of mind,” let alone allows kids to truly enjoy their rights as children. 

This world-first teen social media ban blocking access to children below 16 is “welcomed by parents and child advocates,” on the one hand, and “criticized by major technology companies and free speech advocates” on the other. The question still remains on whether or not Australia has relieved its anxiety over teens on social media but suffice it to say that, seemingly, parents and campaigners have long argued that “incessant scrolling is damaging young minds,” hence this move is a sound start.

Immediately, 10 platforms, namely, Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch have taken reasonable steps to keep children off social media rather than be slapped with “multimillion-dollar fines.”

According to Australia’s Labor government, it’s a “political win that’s gaining international attention and puts it at the forefront of what appears to be a global momentum to rein in the reach and influence of social media platforms.” Insofar as PM Albanese is concerned, “This is Australia leading the world, responding to what is a global issue.”

However, there are at least two things that probably require fine-tuning. For one, experts say the “law won’t address cyberbullying, a broader societal problem that isn’t platform-specific.” 

For another, it’s obliquely world-leading simply because “a lot of the world recognizes that the tools to do this don’t really work yet.” In the course of time, there might be gaps to plug or cleavages to fill in toward seamless implementation and compliance.

In the meantime, this experiment, if we may call it that, is being anxiously monitored and watched by other countries. Rightly or wrongly, it’s the government’s appreciation of some social harm or negative impact upon young people as when teens “spend more time on screens and serve up content that can harm their health and well-being.”

Given that the law is not without justifiable basis, it stands to reason that its implementation is designed to address very concrete concerns. The commissioned study done earlier this year found that “96 percent of children aged 10-15 used social media and that seven out of 10 of them had been exposed to harmful content” which included “misogynistic and violent material as well as content promoting eating disorders and suicide.” 

Furthermore, “one in seven also reported experiencing grooming-type behavior from adults or older children, and more than half said they had been the victim of cyberbullying.”

All told, this age check covered much ground, albeit some critics might suggest extending its rationale to online gaming sites (i.e., Roblox and Discord). This might, in due time, better improve relevant technologies on “age inference,” albeit the deactivation of 200,000 TikTok accounts is the law’s first casualty.