Some social media apps are included in the under-16s ban, while others are still being considered. Photo: Michelle Kroll.
Labor’s world-leading laws to ban children under the age of 16 from using social media have kicked in today (10 December), but the minister responsible for promoting that fact has had to keep a low profile the past few days.
There will be an event today at Kirribilli House in Sydney, hosted by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his embattled Communications Minister Anika Wells, to mark the start of the social media age-restriction changes.
Instead of lauding the groundbreaking reforms far and wide all this week, however, Ms Wells has been trying to hose down the outrage over her expensive flights to New York and costly family gatherings at domestic sporting events – all on the public purse.
The minister issued a statement late on Tuesday, saying she had referred her spending of taxpayers’ money and use of entitlements to Federal Parliament’s independent expenses scrutineers.
“I remain confident all my travel and expenses are within the Framework, but for the avoidance of doubt, I have self-referred my expenditure to the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority for an audit,” she said.
That was, no doubt, partly done to provide a stock-standard, succinct reply to any questions about expenses being asked today.
The minister spoke on radio this morning to spruik the social media ban, but has had to bat away more questions about her expenses.
Meanwhile, Mr Albanese was left this week to carry the ball and get the message out that the social media ban is a positive initiative designed to protect Australian children.
The Prime Minister also recorded a message to all Australian school students to be played in classrooms across the country this week, so he can talk directly to those who the social media changes will affect the most.
This morning, the PM did the bulk of media appearances to promote the social media ban.
He was forced to further defend his minister’s expenses, stating that all MPs benefit from and use the family reunion entitlements.
Mr Albanese also added, when asked why he was doing the TV rounds and not Ms Wells, that the minister was preparing for the Kirribilli event.
“There’s a range of events we have split up between myself, the eSafety commissioner and the minister today,” he said.
The following social media platforms are affected by the ban: Facebook; Instagram; Kick; Reddit; Snapchat; Threads; TikTok; Twitch; X (formerly Twitter); and YouTube.
Other platforms are being considered for inclusion in the ban.
Services that the eSafety Commission currently considers will not be age-restricted are: Discord; GitHub; Google Classroom; LEGO Play; Messenger; Pinterest; Roblox; Steam and Steam Chat; WhatsApp; and YouTube Kids.
Elon Musk’s X was the last to hold out, confirming its compliance with the new laws, but it issued a statement saying it would.
“It’s not our choice – it’s what the Australian law requires,” it said.
There are also reports that messaging board Reddit is preparing to mount a legal challenge to the laws.
Its public statements, however, so far indicate it will comply with the changes even though it disagrees with the “scope, effectiveness and privacy implications” of them.
“We believe strongly in the open internet and the continued accessibility of quality knowledge, information, resources and community building for everyone, including young people,” Reddit posted on social media.
“By limiting account eligibility and putting identity tests on internet usage, this law undermines everyone’s right to both free expression and privacy, as well as account-specific protections.”
The eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, started her Wednesday morning with media appearances and predicted a few hiccups as platforms and families adapt to the new rules.
“Of course, there will be teething issues, and kids are ingenious; they will be finding ways around it,” she told the ABC.
“But the way that we are looking at compliance and enforcement is around systemic failures, and I 100 per cent believe that these companies have the technical capability to achieve this, and they may have come into this kicking and screaming, but now it is time for them to show us their stuff.
“I don’t think everything is going to magically disappear overnight, but we have corrected for that in our regulatory guidance.”
The High Court has agreed to hear a special case from two teenagers challenging the new social media ban.
The teenagers are backed by the Digital Freedom Project, which claims the laws disproportionately burden the implied freedom of political communication.
The Federal Government is prepared to defend the challenge, saying it is on the side of families rather than the platforms.
Shadow communications minister Melissa McIntosh believes the government has not done enough to ensure the ban is effective.
“We have always supported the intent of protecting kids online. It was a Coalition policy to have the under-16s social media ban,” she said.
“My concerns have grown over time. The government set the date for December 10, and they’ve done very little to ensure its success.”
