Google and Meta Request Australia to Postpone Bill on Social Media Ban for Children

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s center-left government in Australia is pushing to pass a new bill aimed at imposing some of the strictest regulations on children’s social media usage globally, with plans to have it become law by the end of the parliamentary year on Thursday.

The bill, introduced last week, was open for public submissions for just one day. Both Google and Meta have urged the government to delay the bill until the results of an age-verification trial are available. This system may use biometrics or government-issued IDs to enforce an age limit for social media access.

Meta expressed concern, stating that without these trial results, both the industry and the public will not fully understand the scope of the age-verification requirements or their potential effects. Meta further criticized the bill, calling it “inconsistent and ineffective” in its current form.

The proposed law would place the responsibility for age verification on social media platforms rather than on parents or children. Companies that fail to comply with the requirements could face fines of up to A$49.5 million ($32 million) for systemic violations.

Although the opposition Liberal Party is likely to support the bill, some independent lawmakers have criticized the government for rushing the process, which has been compressed into just a week. A Senate committee on communications is set to report on the bill on Tuesday.

TikTok, owned by Bytedance, also expressed significant concerns, arguing that the bill lacks clarity and that there has been insufficient consultation with experts, social media platforms, mental health organizations, and young people. TikTok emphasized the need for a more thorough approach when drafting new policy.

Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) raised alarms that the bill could infringe on the human rights of children and young people, including their freedom of expression and access to information. Musk, a vocal advocate for free speech, criticized the Australian government, suggesting that the bill could serve as a covert means of controlling internet access.

Share this post