Australia this week took the final step to enforce the world’s first ban on access to social media for under-16s. The decision, which comes into full force on December 10, has already led Meta – owner of platforms such as Facebook or Instagram – to begin the phased closure of accounts of Australian users aged between 13 and 15. The company confirmed that “compliance with the law will be an ongoing, multi-layered process” and that affected young people will be able to download all content before deactivation.
The measure affects an estimated universe of 150 thousand accounts on Facebook and 350 thousand on Instagram. Since Threads relies on Instagram, it is also included. Platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Reddit or Twitch are also covered by this law, unlike Whatsapp, as it is primarily a private messaging platform. Anyone who tries to circumvent the ban risks fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars (around 28 million euros).
The Australian government justifies the ban with the need to protect young people. Communications Minister Anika Wells has insisted that the priority is “the safety of younger generations”, remembering that social networks “pull young people into a kind of purgatory through predatory algorithms” that work like “behavioral cocaine”. Quoted by the BBC, Wells states that she wants to “give the Alpha Generation” (under 15 years of age) a rest and says she is alert to any young people escaping to lesser-known applications, such as Yope or Lemon8.
Political pressure on social media increased after a study commissioned by the government revealed that 96 percent of children aged 10 to 15 use social media, seven in ten have come across harmful content and more than half have suffered episodes of cyberbullying. One in seven reported grooming behaviors by adults or older youth.
The commissioner for digital security, Julie Inman Grant, who had initially classified the measure as excessive, ended up changing her position. “We’ve reached a tipping point. There are misleading and harmful features that not even adults can fight against. What chance do children have?”he said at a cybersecurity meeting in Sydney, cited by Reuters. Grant believes this could be the first piece of a “global domino effect”.
In Portugal, the National Ethics Council rejects the ban and warns of risks
In Portugal, the president of the National Ethics Council for Life Sciences (CNECV), Maria do Céu Patrão Neves, considers The prohibitive path followed by the Australian government is “impoverishing”. In an interview with Renaissance Radioargues that we cannot just look at restrictions, ignoring digital literacy and the role of families. AND advocate one more effective articulation between digital literacy and parental supervision, as proposed by the joint opinion of the CNECV and the Spanish Bioethics Council, which is being finalized.
For Maria do Céu Patrão Neves, the answer must be based on a “dynamic balance” between restriction and education. The president of the CNECV emphasizes that there are “emotionally immature and vulnerable young people, exposed to content that affects mental health”, but insists that the solution must be “more comprehensive and involve political decision-makers, schools and families”.
The official also highlights the ban on the use of cell phones in schools, which she considers positive. “In this case, we are talking about a very strict prohibition in an educational context”, observed. And he argues that the results are already being felt: “There has been much more interaction between young people, with the development of much-needed social skills such as dialogue, conflict resolution or sharing games.”
For now, the Australian decision will certainly be followed by governments around the world, attentive to the impacts that will emerge from the ongoing social experience.