Australia’s recent decision to ban social media users under 16 has sparked international debate about the best approach to protecting young people online. While proponents highlight research showing potential harms from youth social media use, opponents raise concerns about privacy risks from age verification systems and worry that bans may push teenagers toward less regulated platforms.
Rather than implementing outright age restrictions, experts suggest targeting specific harmful features first. Different online dangers require distinct solutions: child exploitation may be addressed by making youth profiles less discoverable, cyberbullying can be reduced through controls on anonymous accounts, and compulsive use patterns stem from features like infinite scroll and algorithmic recommendations that could be restricted across all age groups. Examining each problem individually reveals that most can be modified without removing young people from these services entirely.
For situations requiring age verification, the approach should mirror systems used in other high-stakes industries like pharmaceuticals and construction. This means establishing expert-led safety standards, requiring companies to undergo pre-approval security reviews, and funding government oversight through substantial fees from vendors and platforms. Countries including Indonesia and Canada are adopting this intermediate strategy, requiring platforms to meet specific safety criteria before allowing child accounts.
Experts propose treating online child safety as an ongoing regulatory challenge rather than a single intervention. Drawing parallels to automotive safety regulations, which have dramatically reduced emissions and fatalities over decades, a sustained approach combining targeted restrictions, industry standards, and government oversight offers promise for meaningful improvement.
Originally reported by Livescience →
About the Author
