Australian Greens' Dissenting Report

1.1The Australian Greens are extremely disappointed to see the major parties attempt to ram through this so-called ‘world-leading’ legislation without any scrutiny, despite its many complexities and far-reaching consequences. This has happened just days after the Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society (Joint Select Committee) handed down its final majority report which did not recommend an age ban on social media to lock young people out.

1.2The Joint Select Committee heard over and over that an age-ban will not make social media safer for anyone. Instead, what the recommendations in that majority report were designed to do is make platforms safer for all Australians, with fit-for-purpose regulation that will disrupt the predatory business models of the tech giants and help to hold them accountable. They were intended to empower and educate young people, and all social media users, not punish them, with the onus on the tech companies making enormous profits from hate, outrage and targeted advertising to act with a duty of care and be held accountable.

1.3With this context, the major parties’ intention to pass this legislation in under a week is rushed, reckless and goes against expert evidence. It also comes before the Australian Government has released the Online Safety Act 2021 review and its 67recommendations, and ahead of the age assurance trial being undertaken by the Government.

1.4Despite experts, young people and the broader community having had minimal time to make submissions or be heard by the Senate, it has become evident that this bill is a complex idea with little support. It could have far-reaching consequences for privacy, mental health, silencing young peoples’ voices and online safety for everyone in the long-run ‒ and may even be unconstitutional.[1] These concerns must be appropriately considered before rushing in a ban to lock young people out of social media.

1.5Parents are rightly concerned about the safety of their children online—but while this bill seems like a solution, it is a band aid that does nothing to resolve the root causes of online harms. Prohibition is not how you make platforms safer or empower citizens, including young people, to navigate the online world in a safe way. Instead, young people will either get around it, be pushed into darker and less safe corners of the internet, or be dropped in the deep end when they turn 16—and the platforms will be no safer when they do.

1.6Many mental health experts and academics have spoken against the bill, highlighting the benefits of online spaces for young people in connecting and learning. At particular risk are young people in regional and rural areas and LGBTIQA+ kids who use social media to feel less isolated and to connect with others which boosts their mental health. In addition, social media provides a platform for young people to engage in politics or kickstart future careers, and banning platforms would stifle this ability. Social media is a critical source of political information and communication for children − not only would this ban potentially impede on freedom of political communication, raising questions of constitutionality, but banning young people from these platforms would suppress future youth-led initiatives like the Schools Strike 4 Climate movement or Channel 6 news, founded by Leo Puglisi at the age of 12.

1.7Less explored and investigated due to the outrageous timeframe for this inquiry, is the impact that banning social media will have on other industries like Australian music. Discoverability is the major challenge for up-and-coming Australian artists, and many rely on social media platforms to reach new audiences. Banning young people from platforms will curb the ability of young audiences to discover new music, right at the age when they are developing and exploring their musical tastes. It will also stop younger artists sharing their work which has proven to be absolutely vital to the success of award-winning Australian artists like Troye Sivan and Ruel who were sharing their music on YouTube and other social media platforms years before they turned 16.

1.8Community members have raised privacy concerns about data being provided to platforms in order to enforce an age ban. The bill does not prescribe how platforms will monitor and enforce an age ban, and the Australian Government’s age assurance trial is yet to commence. While the bill implements some privacy protections to prohibit platforms from using information collected for age assurance, many community members and experts have concerns about the sharing of important data with historically untrustworthy platforms who profit from selling users’ data.

1.9The Australian Government has indicated its intention to create exemptions for certain websites under regulation down the track. However, the approach to implement a blanket ban and then exempt certain platforms later leaves a lot of responsibility to a future government and uncertainty remains for young people and platforms. Some platforms, like Google, have suggested a designation approach rather than exemption approach.

1.10Ultimately, as highlighted time and time again, the approach of a ban will not make online spaces safer for anyone. Everyone is on the same page about needing to make online spaces safer, but experts across a range of fields and young people are calling strongly not for prohibition but for regulation of the platforms themselves, including legislating a duty of care. There are international examples to draw on, such as the European Union’s Digital Services Act which has a number of protections for minors, including banning use of profiling for ads on children, and implementing obligations for children’s safety that providers must abide by. We can’t let the tech giants off the hook, and need real solutions to address the root of harms including dangerous algorithms that target our communities with divisive and damaging content.

1.11Given this legislation would be a world first—with no country successfully implementing an age ban—it is more important than ever that the detail is thought out properly. Yet seemingly no evidence or consultation with experts has been taken into account. In this context, the Australian Government's proposed ban on social media appears to be a knee-jerk reaction to a complex problem. Parents are rightfully worried about the safety of their kids online, but they also know unless platforms are forced to clean up their act, their child won’t be safe online when they turn 16 either.

1.12That the bill not pass.

1.13That the bill be referred to further inquiry.

1.14That the Australian Government introduce legislation to implement a digital duty of care and prohibit platforms from harvesting and exploiting the data of minors and protect young people from targeted, unsolicited advertisements and algorithms as a matter of priority.

1.15That the Minister for Communications immediately release the Online Safety Act 2021 review.

1.16That the Australian Government invest in education for young people and their families to help develop digital literacy and online safety skills, and equip them with the tools and resources they need for positive and responsible online use.

Senator Sarah Hanson-Young

Deputy Chair

Footnotes

[1]Professor Sarah Joseph, ‘Banning under-16s from social media may be unconstitutional – and ripe for High Court challenge’, The Conversation, 25 November 2024; Human Rights Law Centre, Albanese Government should curb social media harms, instead of banning social media for teens.