Risks posed to children online are all too real, but Australia’s ban is too blunt an instrument

Australia is once again leading the global field in its efforts to protect children online, with the

latest proposal to ban access to social media for children under the age of 16.

Explaining his proposals to the public, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said

“This one is for the mums and dads… They, like me, are worried sick about the safety of our

kids online. I want Australian families to know that the government has your back.”

Carried by a groundswell of public support, it has sailed through the House of

Representatives and the Senate. But is this the best way of protecting children online?

Clearly not everyone is in favour; it’s no surprise that the ubiquitous (and frankly tiresome)

Elon Musk has waded in with his two cents, denouncing its implications for free speech.

More importantly, a letter issued by the Australian Child Rights Taskforce – and co-signed by

140 Australian academics, international experts, and civil society organisations – argues that

the proposed legislation is too blunt an instrument. The letter’s authors recognise the harm

posed to children but disagree with the ban because it will effectively exclude children from

the online world.

Whilst CyberSafeKids and the movement of which we are part – GenFree – has called for

new (or amended) legislation to better protect children online in our election asks for the new

government, I don’t think the Australian government is tackling it from the right angle.

Any new legislation should focus on addressing the breadth of harm within the environments

that children inhabit online.

For a start, the ban reportedly won’t even address all the most popular places children go

online: YouTube, WhatsApp and Roblox are notably absent, along with other gaming

platforms. These apps are hugely popular with children in Ireland and they are also among

the most likely places for children to be exposed to harm and risk (see our ‘Left to their own

Devices’ report published in September).

Let’s focus on the principal risks that children face in the online world, helpfully categorised

into ‘the ‘4 Cs’ of online safety’: Content, Contact, Contract and Conduct.

– Content relates to the inappropriate content they are exposed to across many

different platforms, sometimes shared by peers, but primarily served up through the

recommender algorithm. This can be overwhelming, and its express purpose is

keeping high user engagement, regardless of age.

– Contact relates to all forms of harmful contact children might encounter in online

environments, primarily for the purposes of grooming and extortion. Rates for both of

these are rising globally at an alarming rate.

– Contract (or Commerce as it’s sometimes known) relates to the commercial

exploitation of children. The Harvard School of Public Health published a report last

December that showed six online services in the US (TikTok, X, Snapchat, YouTube,

Instagram and Facebook) made a combined total of $11 billion from advertising to

children in 2022, $2 billion of which was to children under the age of 12 (all of whom

are under their minimum age requirement).

– Conduct relates to harmful behaviour online, including cyberbullying.

Will the new Australian law address the range of harms I’ve outlined above? For me, the

answer is clearly ‘no’. Yes, I applaud the intention of Albanese’s government and their

willingness to lead, but this is too blunt an instrument. It is too narrowly focused on traditional

interpretations of social media, excludes really popular online environments for children, and

ultimately, will ban them from places they want to be online, pushing them to less-scrutinised

environments that are not being regulated.

We (CyberSafeKids and GenFree) want to see legislation that has the end goal of wanting

children to thrive online. They are growing up in a digital age in which they have a right to

participate. Of course, they also have a right to be protected from harm, which is why it’s

vital that legislative proposals focus on the harms across the board, rather than only some of

the places they hang out online, like TikTok and Snapchat.

In Ireland and more generally in Europe, I hope that we will introduce measures that focus

on tackling the very real harms children face online, measures that compel the billionaire

tech companies behind the myriad of services that children use to create safer online spaces

for them – spaces that are safe by design and by default.

You cannot entirely remove risk from the online world for children but as a society, we can

do far more to protect and empower them. That will include laws that will genuinely combat

harm, education in schools that upskills children, and support for parents to provide vital

frontline support and good guidance. No small task, but entirely achievable.

Alex Cooney is Chief Executive of CyberSafeKids

Published Tuesday, 3rd December, 2024 in the Irish Independent

Read our latest Trends and Usage Report ‘Left To Their Own Devices’ here