Another Australian Government – another totally terrible Australian tech policy. Let’s run through this quickly. It’s worth noting that this policy is being introduced at the same time as another ridiculously overbearing policy which might make criticism of any policies illegal. Update: Details about which social media will and won’t be included are now filtering through. There have been last minute adjustments due to various outcries, but what’s left is still a hot mess. I’ll update this as details are locked down.
Can’t be bothered to read any further? All adults will be expected to prove they’re not children for every single ‘social media’ account they use (personal or shared) by linking with government-approved (probably biometric) digital IDs.
We’ve been here before – many times – and we’ll likely be here again. So, let’s start with the tl;dr form answer:
Who is it this time?
[X] Red lot
[ ] Blue lot
[X} The other lot are supporting it, too (LibLab)
Who in particular?
[X] Stephen Conroy / Michelle Rowland
[ ] Some Attorney General
[ ] Darth Potato
[ ] Malcolm Turnbull
[ ] Tony Abbott
[ ] ScoMo
[X] Other____ Albo
Stated reason for introduction
[ ] Immigrants
[ ] Keeping Australians safe from, ‘the Bogeyman’
[ ] National Security and TERRORISTS!!!!!!
[ ] Protection of strategic interests regarding an unaligned Indo-Pacific regional player
[X] WoN’t SOmEbodY tHiNK oF tHe cHiLdReN?!
[ ] Yet more privacy-diluting police powers to, “fight crime”
Are there any other things are happening in the country/world that this might be distracting from? (List all)
Housing crisis
Cost of living crisis
US Election
Climate collapse
Wars across the world
Falling polls
New Misinformation laws (even the loopy IPA is against this)
New Digital Duty of Care laws
Will overseas coverage of said policy make Australians look like banjo-playing yahoos with an overinflated opinion of their place on the world stage?
[X] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Give it a few weeks
Is the legislation so broadly worded that’s it’s impossible to define and so can be used haphazardly to prosecute potentially anybody and everybody?
[ ] Yes
[X] Obviously
Does the stated goal stand-up to glance-level scrutiny that Australia’s most lazy and hysterical MSM elements can run with?
[ ] Yes
[X] Obviously. They’re not that dumb
Does the stated goal fall apart under even a modicum of scrutiny?
[ ] Yes
[X] Obviously
What will the likely outcome of the legislation be? (Can choose multiple)
[X] Massive waste of money
[X] Probably make the situation worse
[X] Some poor and vulnerable people will have their lives ruined
[X] More opportunities for police overreach
Is the policy even workable?
[ ] No
[X] Of course not
Will the policy break things if implemented?
[ ] Yes
[X] Of course
Does the policy have Leopards Ate My Face potential for those that support it?
[X] Yes
[ ] No
Related: Best Business Laptops for work & school
Related: Best Gaming Laptops
Related: Best Portable Laptop
Which rapid-fire slurs can be hurled at anyone who criticises the policy?
[ ] Nazi
[ ] Pedophile
[X] Child abuser
[ ] Terrorist
[ ] Misogynist
Does the policy have greater privacy-breaching implications than anything else?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[X] Probably
[ ] Probably not
Will cybercriminals be salivating at the opportunities afforded by this legislation
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[X] Probably
[ ] Probably not
Is the prohibition going to be facile to circumvent?
[ ] Yes
[X] Obviously
Will it be a defining issue that loses the government votes?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[X] Probably
[ ] Probably not
What’s happening?
Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, wants to limit access to social media to those 16 years old and above.
Why is he saying that he wants to do that?
He says that social media is bad for kids’ mental health and can even lead to suicide and that, “He’s calling time on that.”
I’ve no idea about technology, what’s the problem with that?
It’s like saying, I’ve had enough of fatal car crashes, I’m setting a blanket speed limit of 20Kph across the country and putting speed bumps on every motorway. That wouldn’t work because cars aren’t geared to go that slow [not practical to implement]; you can’t enforce it everywhere at once [sporadic, haphazard policing]; people will be focused on their speedometers and not where they’re going [introduces new problems that it’s supposed to fix], most people will just ignore it and use other routes [which are far more dangerous].
I don’t have kids, what’s the big issue?
Kids use social media to communicate and play with their friends. YouTube is their equivalent of television. Pushing them off places like Facebook Kids Messenger means they’ll go somewhere far less regulated.
What will the stated/actual effects be?
Every adult will have to prove they’re not a child by connecting every ‘social media’ log-in they use – whether it’s personal or shared for work – with a government-approved, digital ID which may include biometric information like face scans.
Which sites/apps/games are include and which are not?
The definitions being given by the government are a contradictory mess that illustrate a total lack of understanding of the realities of online services and media.
Update: The following will soon be adjusted now that details are filtering through. We’ve been told yes to YouTube, Instagram, Discord and TikTok. Bizarrely, Michelle Rowland recently said Snapchat could be exempt (After a backlash from even the most fanatical supporters, this is now likely to be included). Rapidly growing Twitter alternative, BlueSky, hasn’t been mentioned.
Noone has even mentioned porn and war favourite, Telegram, which even Putin couldn’t influence. ‘Freedom of speech’ site Rumble (a YouTube alternative) is also waiting in the wings and it would actually be funny to see their response to any demands from the Australian government. LinkedIn hasn’t been mentioned. Neither have adult sites like Pornhub.
Reddit, which is increasingly becoming a porn warehouse in addition to a ‘wisdom of crowds’ source of information for Google, doesn’t appear to have been mentioned. Simply searching the word, ‘Hair’ on Reddit is illustrative as to why kids should not be there. It won’t be long before they’re encouraged to take their clothes off for the internet.
Whatsapp – one of the most popular messaging and media sharing apps, hasn’t been talked about.
If you don’t already know about 4Chan, don’t find out.
Ultimately, no distinction between interactive messenger services, games and media websites, has been made.
Analysis and Issues
Social media bullying was a hot topic over a decade ago but it’s a very different beast nowadays. Most networks have parental and automated oversight controls for younger children that check who they’re talking to and what they’re saying. You can read about them, here:
Discord Teen and Child Safety Policy
The stigma of not getting many Likes on personal posts have been removed in many areas; and many younger people have given up posting personal information because it was an avenue for bullying so they simply stopped anyway.
One of Albanese’s justifications for the laws is, “The fact is that young women see images of particular body shapes that have a real impact in the real world.” That’s all media, not just social media.
If kids can’t talk to each other using social media apps (like Roblox and Facebook Kids Messenger in my case) what are they supposed to do? Use an olden days phone? Use a modern smartphone with access to the internet? Lose contact with their friends? Use an app that’s not legislated against like Wickr? How is any of that beneficial?
I’ll be updating this article with (much) more. For now, though, this has all the hallmarks of being yet another one of these pollie tech thought bubbles:
Australian Classification Laws
Last Updated on January 17, 2025 by Nick Ross
