In a recent address at the New South Wales and South Australian government social media summit, Federal Minister for Communications, Michelle Rowland, elaborated on the federal government’s controversial proposal to impose a social media ban aimed specifically at younger users. This initiative emerged shortly after South Australia introduced legislation to ban children under 14 from accessing social media platforms. The government’s intentions, however, have faced significant criticism from experts, with an open letter signed by over 120 specialists urging Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the governing bodies to reconsider their approach. Despite the mounting criticism, the government appears steadfast, moving forward with the social media ban, leaving many to question the efficacy and safety implications of such a measure.
During her speech, Rowland revealed that the government plans to amend the Online Safety Act, shifting the accountability from parents and children to the social media platforms themselves. This change entails a year-long implementation period intended to allow both the industry and regulatory bodies ample time to develop the necessary frameworks and processes. The government emphasizes that the new regulations will take into consideration the need for social media configurations that foster safe interactions while minimizing potential harms.
One proposed strategy includes establishing clearer guidelines for social media platforms, seeking to address addictive features that contribute to harmful user experiences. The plan suggests prioritizing content from followed accounts and developing age-appropriate versions of applications. Additionally, an “exemption framework” is in development to gauge the ‘low-risk’ status of social media services for children. While these measures may sound promising, they also raise a multitude of complex questions regarding the definition of harm and the subjective experiences of different users.
One of the central issues with the proposed social media ban centers around defining what constitutes a “low risk of harm.” Experts note that risk assessment in the realm of social media is inherently complex and cannot be ineffectively quantified by merely evaluating the platform or the age of its user. Risk exists on a continuum, where the potential dangers that one individual may face could vary significantly from those experienced by another. Thus, accurately categorizing social media platforms as either safe or risky proves to be an impractical task.
Consequently, if the government focuses primarily on minor adjustments to platform designs, they may overlook broader issues contributing to harmful experiences. A case in point is the purported “teen-friendly” version of Instagram being developed by Meta. While intended to provide a safer online environment for young users, the mere existence of harmful content remains a substantial concern, calling into question the fundamental premise behind these ‘low-risk’ versions.
The narrative surrounding social media exposure for children often emphasizes the introduction of a parent-controlled environment as a solution. However, this perspective can lead parents to develop a misleading sense of security regarding their children’s online activities. Studies show that when individuals lack the necessary life skills to navigate social media responsibly, many potential risks may simply be postponed rather than effectively addressed. By allowing children access to social media without fostering appropriate guidance, they may struggle to deal with harmful influences independently as they transition to unrestricted accounts.
It is crucial to recognize that harmful content on social media does not exclusively affect young people; such risks demand attention from all demographic segments, including adults. The federal government’s insistence on focusing solely on creating ‘low-risk’ accounts for minors may be misguided. Instead of narrowing the focus exclusively to youth, a more holistic approach that ensures safety for all users across age groups, regardless of their status, is warranted.
To effectively safeguard all users from potential harm, the government should emphasize the necessity of comprehensive mechanisms for reporting and removing inappropriate content on social media platforms. Platforms must facilitate user-friendly options to block harmful accounts, especially in instances of harassment or bullying. It is imperative that the requirements for ‘low-risk’ social media accounts incorporate these protective measures to systematically mitigate harm at the source.
Moreover, the government could serve as a vital resource, providing educational materials and strategies for both parents and children to navigate online content safely. Recent data from New South Wales indicates overwhelming support among parents for increased efforts to educate both youths and themselves about social media’s inherent risks. By adopting a proactive educational model, similar to measures proposed by the South Australian government, Australia could cultivate a more responsible online environment that balances safety while preserving the benefits of social media engagement for young Australians.
Leave a Reply