‘Grand social experiment’: Australia’s social media ban turns heads globally, with mixed results | Social media ban
The BBC blogged about it, News Corp bragged about it, and the New York Times questioned its effectiveness.
Australia’s world-first laws that prevent children from accessing social media until they turn 16 have attracted global attention, with mixed and nuanced results.
BBC in England I ran a live blog explores young people’s views, explores how to judge success and hears from critics who argue the ban could “isolate vulnerable young people and push children into unregulated corners of the internet”.
Inside TimesFormer Conservative education minister Lord John Nash wrote that Australia was taking a “bold stand” along with Malaysia and other countries looking at similar bans. He is pressing for Britain to adopt the Australian model.
News agency Reuters Outlined moves to implement various age-based measures in the UK, China, Malaysia, the US, the European Union and various European countries.
in the USA, Politico ran a special campaign with potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidate Rahm Emanuel, who is a fan of the ban. He told the broadcaster that “anything that allows us to focus on improving academic standards and protecting our children on a public health basis will be a priority.”
The New York Times said before the ban went into effect that it was a “major social experiment.”
After the ban came into force, an article was published stating that Australia’s experience could be a template for other countries.cautionary taleWhile fans talk about social media’s suicide and mental health risks, the Times reported that three out of four children surveyed plan to continue using social media, according to ABC’s survey.
One separate pieceHe cited Amnesty International as questioning the effectiveness of blanket bans. “Banning means they will continue to be secretly exposed to the same harms, leaving them at even greater risk,” the organization said in a statement. he said.
Danish Minister of Digital Affairs, Caroline Stage Olsen, he told CNN He said that Denmark’s aim to ban social media for children under 15 was to keep children safer and that there was “not that much” of a reaction there.
Al Jazeera spoke a number of experts and I heard: how difficult it would be to implement; that banning some things alone does not work; that age verification methods are “often inaccurate” or can be circumvented; Damages occurred on platforms not covered by the ban; and noted that for many young people, access to social media can be “not only beneficial but life-saving.”
“Research conducted in Australia and other countries has shown that the impact of social media on young people is complex and varies widely,” the news report said.
What the local newspapers said
Sydney Morning Herald reported on some of the obstacles the ban would face along the way. It was stated that the young people were planning temporary solutions and a fight was continuing in the high court. Recent polls show that while most voters support the policy, many also doubt it will work.
A teaser on the front page of the Australian Financial Review read: “It’s the algorithm, stupid: under-16 ban misses the mark.”
The Australian was relatively plain, news piece both about the ban and the travel travails of the minister in charge, and an additional piece about how “disaffected young people” plan to circumvent the ban with make-up, their parents’ identities and secret networks.
Australia’s News Corp tabloids, meanwhile, were beating their own drum. The front page of the Daily Telegraph declared that the “world-leading legislation” was the result of News Corp’s Let There Be Children campaign, as well as the “courage of parents whose children are dying because of social media”.
The paper’s editorial read like a Walkley award entry, describing how his campaign persevered in the face of pushback from ultra-rich tech companies to usher in a “new and rational era of social media regulation.”
The Herald Sun had a similar atmosphere and promised children a safer and brighter future thanks to the newspaper’s campaign.
Tell that to the 36 Months lobbyists, South Australian premier Peter Malinauskas (and his wife Annabel West), US psychologist Jonathan Haidt, former opposition leader Peter Dutton and eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant, who played key roles along the way.
