The federal government has confirmed its forthcoming youth social media ban will require Australians of all ages to confirm their age when accessing social media.
Last week, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese affirmed the government will be ploughing ahead with its plans for a social media ban preventing under-16-year-olds from accessing such platforms as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X and video streaming platform YouTube.
The unprecedented ban has drawn swathes of criticism – not only for threatening pivotal community and educational resources for youth social media users – but also for the logistics of how it will be implemented.
During a Senate Committee hearing last week, Greens senator David Shoebridge probed the means of delivery for an age-based social media ban – revealing the technology currently trialled for the initiative would effectively require users of all ages to run through an age assurance check.
When asked whether “everybody” will have to go through the age-checking process as part of testing whether a user is aged 16-plus, James Chisholm – deputy secretary of communications and media at the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts (DITRDCA) – simply replied “yes”.
“So, this isn't just about privacy or collecting data about kids,” said Shoebridge.
“This is literally everybody accessing social media, that's how it has to work, isn't it?”
“Yes,” replied Andrew Irwin, assistant secretary of online safety at DITRDCA.
Shoebridge then raised privacy and data protection implications for “literally everybody accessing social media”, only to be rebuffed by a passing mention of the government having commissioned “consumer research”.
“We have commissioned consumer research to look at consumer willingness and particular aspects that are important,” said Irwin.
When Shoebridge asked where he could find details about protecting the privacy of children and Australians at large, Irwin took the question on notice.
“There’s a reason the Government isn’t telling you how they intend social media age bans to be enforced,” Shoebridge told Information Age.
“It’s because they know it will involve the surrendering of personal information from everyone.
“Make no mistake, this is a national age verification system masquerading as being about online safety for children.”
Verification and assurance
While it was only in June that Australia’s eSafety Commissioner said age bans were unlikely to happen on short notice, by September the government began testing technologies for the initiative.
This testing involved a $6.5 million “age assurance” trial which Chisholm explained is distinct from “age verification”.
While Chisholm noted age verification “requires verification of identity” and might involve the use of identity documents, age assurance is a “broader term” which “uses other technologies and tools to assess whether a person is likely to fall into a particular age bracket or not”.
Such technologies, which Chisholm pens as “innovative”, may involve detecting keystrokes, facial recognition or question-and-answer measures to “make an assessment about whether a person is a certain age”.
While Chisholm noted the trialled “age assurance” technologies are “not quite there yet” and are only just “getting to the point where they can distinguish between certain ages”, he and Irwin were unable to immediately confirm whether users will have their age tested every time they interact with social media.
Shoebridge repeatedly asked whether age assurance would occur during account creation or as an ongoing obligation, while Irwin replied the approach remains “subject to legislative design”.
“[Once] is a one-off privacy issue,” said Shoebridge.
“The other [option] is that every single time you interact on social media your details, your age, your personal attributes are constantly being interrogated.”
Chisholm meanwhile added a social media age limit will proceed regardless of the outcomes of the age assurance trial.
“To be really clear, the age limit will be applied and the way in which industry seeks to comply with it will be a matter for industry,” said Chisholm.
Legislation just around the corner
The Albanese-led social media ban is not only being critiqued as a “thinly veiled” attempt to broadly enhance government controls over social media usage, but has further been lambasted as rushed and ill-planned.
With the legislation expected to be introduced next week, Albanese said the ban would take effect some 12 months after being passed.
Albanese also affirmed underage users will not face penalties for accessing social media, leaving the onus on social media platforms to enforce the forthcoming age limit.
Despite sparking nationwide controversy, the prime minister has been notably vague in the motives for the ban, citing opaque online harms Australian youth are facing while using social media platforms.
While the last few years have undoubtedly seen young Australians struggling with online misinformation, re-sharing of personal images, cyber bullying and even explicit AI deepfakes of their likeness, the wide-arching ban has been criticised as an overly broad response to such issues.
The prime minister revealed last week no child under 16 will be permitted to use covered social media platforms even with parental consent – while similar legislative actions in France and Texas, USA allow parents to provide consent for their children.
Meanwhile, similar action in New York has proven specific issues such as social media addiction can be addressed with specific actions instead of a blunt-force ban, with the city recently limiting algorithmic recommendations and data usage for underage users.
Shoebridge meanwhile told Information Age it “makes no sense” for the government to advance the long-awaited Children’s Online Privacy Code – which aims to “make online experiences far safer by design” – while simultaneously rushing out a blanket ban.
“It will also have the convenient side effect of ensuring no future Greta Thunberg could share their message, something that undoubtedly benefits both Labor and the Coalition and the Murdoch media,” said Shoebridge.
“There is a real risk this will drive young people away from safer regulated platforms and towards spaces where bullying and image-based abuse cannot be controlled,” he added.
