Social media ban: Anthony Albanese stares down tech giants as States back contentious age limit

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is staring down pushback from tech giants and scepticism from experts as he pushes ahead with his social media age limit.

National cabinet on Friday greenlight Mr Albanese’s world-first plan to ban under 16s from platforms such as Facebook and Instagram, with legislation to be introduced when Federal Parliament returns later this month.

“Social media is doing social harm to our young Australians, and I’m calling time on it,” Mr Albanese said.

The Prime Minister said Tasmania pushed for a lower age of 14 but ultimately accepted setting the bar at 16 to ensure consistent rules across the country.

Under the proposal signed off by Mr Albanese’s cabinet earlier this week and endorsed by Premiers, TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, X, and even YouTube will have to take “reasonable steps” to ensure young users are not on their platforms — even if they have parental permission.

The social media companies would face penalties if they do not comply.

Social media experts are already warning the ban will not work with predictions tech-savvy teenagers will find ways to circumvent age restrictions.

There are also unanswered questions about the age verification process, including what types of ID checks would be conducted on users.

The Government, tech companies, regulators, parents and users will have 12 months to prepare for the new regime once the legislation passes Parliament.

Meta — the parent company of Facebook and Instagram — wants responsibility for policing age verification to rest with app stores, rather than individual platforms such as theirs.

“If every single app is required to implement its own age-appropriate controls, then the burden really is going to fall on young people and parents for each of the different apps that a young person wants to use,” Meta’s Australia and New Zealand Policy direction Mia Garlick told ABC’s RN Breakfast.

“At the moment, when you get a new phone or a new device, you do spend a bit of time sitting down as a family, setting it all up, and age information is collected at that time.

“And so there is a really simple solution there, that at that one point in time, then the verification can occur.”

Mr Albanese dismissed the Meta model, insisting the Federal Government’s approach struck the right balance.

“We expect that there’ll be some opposition to it,” he said. “That’s not surprising.”

Mr Albanese accepted some children would slip through the net, just as children under-18 find ways to get their hands on alcohol.

“It doesn’t mean you say, ‘oh well, it’s all too hard. Let’s let it rip,” he said.

The federal Opposition supports a social media age limit of 16, meaning the legislation will pass when it’s eventually put to a vote.

However, shadow communications minister David Coleman was concerned some platforms would be handed exemptions, weakening laws that “are desperately needed to protect young Australians”.

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the only potential candidates for exemptions would be platforms such as YouTube Kids, a filtered version of the video-sharing platform designed specially for children.

Children would not be blocked from accessing educational resources or health services operating on platforms, such as for mental health, Ms Rowland said.

Speaking ahead of the National Cabinet meeting, NDIS Minister Bill Shorten said the tech giants had the tools to enforce the age limit and should not be able to shirk their responsibilities.

“I’m a student of history, we had to argue to protect our kids from working in coal mines and factories,” he told RN Breakfast.

“And those factory owners said that would be the end of them. When we first proposed to have mandatory seat belts to protect people, our car companies said that would just be the end of it. And well, you know what? It’s not. And we don’t ask civilians and car users to bring their own seat belts to a car. So, why should social media companies buck past their own duty of care?”