Google, Meta, TikTok and X criticize Australian bill banning under-16s from social media

Gray/AFP

A bill in Australia is worrying social networks. A federal law establishing an age limit for these sites, described as a “scourge” two months ago by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, could be adopted by the Australian Parliament and require Internet users to provide their personal data to prove their majority. Google and Meta have urged the authorities to delay the reform, in order to assess the impact of this text and its adoption. X and TikTok have instead expressed their concern about the repercussions of such a law on freedom of expression. Many fear that such a law will open the way to a form of control and censorship.  

At the beginning of September, Labor Party member Anthony Albanese announced a bill intended to prohibit children under the age of 14 or 16 from accessing the services offered by social networks. The PM said he would prefer to see young people “away from their screens, on football pitches, in swimming pools and on tennis courts”. “We want them to have real experiences with real people because we know that social media is hurting society,” he said.   

The doubts of Google, Meta and TikTok 

His government quickly set about drafting the bill, which was presented to Parliament on Thursday, November 21, 2024. What does the text provide for? ? Fines of more than 50 million Australian dollars (around 31 million euros, Editor's note) are envisaged for the most recalcitrant companies. This legislation, considered one of the toughest in its field both in Australia and elsewhere in the world, would require social media groups to take measures to prevent under-16s from accessing platforms such as X, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram. 

The bill also includes strict privacy protections that would require tech giants to delete any information collected for age verification. Telecommunications Minister Michelle Rowland said the internet giants were responsible for the “safety and mental health” of Australians. “It is the responsibility of social media platforms, not parents or children, to ensure that safeguards are in place,” she said.  

Some platforms will be exempted, including YouTube and its educational content, and messaging services like WhatsApp.  

Another reason given by the Australian executive: the numerous cases of cyberbullying and sexual exploitation of minors in recent years, or the dissemination of “content that is illegal or dangerous to children”. If the proposed law is adopted, technology platforms will benefit from a one-year grace period to apply it. 

Despite a commitment on their part, companies are expressing many reservations, warnings and doubts, both on the technical feasibility and on the impact of a regulatory initiative deemed too hasty.  

Yesterday, Tuesday, Google and Meta Platforms, Facebook's parent company, urged the Australian government to delay the adoption of this bill, which was only open for comments for one day. In the opinion of these two GAFAM, the executive should first test an age verification device, which could be based on biometric data or government identification. “In the absence of such results, neither the industry nor Australians will understand the nature or extent of the age verification required by the bill, nor the impact of these measures on Australians,” said Meta, who regrets an “incoherent and ineffective bill in its current form”.  

The same observation is made by Google, which believes that the rush to adopt the proposed bill did not take into account technical feasibility. “This issue could be addressed by the government’s trial of age verification technologies prior to legislation. This includes the viability of age verification technologies and an appropriate minimum age for accessing social media services. This trial is not expected to complete its work until mid-2025,” Google’s submission states. 

Bytedance's TikTok, meanwhile, deplored a “lack of clarity.” The Chinese company said it was “very concerned” about the bill, which could be adopted “without detailed consultation with experts, social media platforms, mental health organizations, and young people.” “When new legislation is proposed, it is important that it is drafted thoroughly and thoughtfully to ensure that it is capable of achieving its stated objective. That has not been the case with this bill,” TikTok said. 

A desire to censor ? 

X boss Elon Musk had already reacted last week by criticizing the Australian government in an X post. The billionaire believes that this bill “seems to be a backdoor way of controlling access to the Internet by all Australians”. His platform, which mainstream media have been leaving in recent days under the pretext of the spread of disinformation, has also spoken out on the initiative of the Australian Labor Party. The social network says it fears a negative impact on the human rights of young people and children, in particular freedom of expression and access to information.

While the opposition Liberal Party is expected to support the bill, lawmakers have also accused the government of rushing into it. Instead, experts have expressed doubts about the technical feasibility of a strict age-based ban, pointing to the challenges of reliably verifying age while respecting privacy. One issue that has been raised is the intrusive nature of the verification, which would require individuals to hand over their personal data to prove they are of legal age. Such a measure is seen by many as an additional form of control that opens the door to censorship and the end of anonymity. Others also fear that it will push young people into more dangerous digital spaces. 

Australia is not alone in considering age restrictions on social media. Spain, for example, passed a similar law in June banning access to those under 16. The issue is equally debated in Britain. In the US state of Florida, a law is due to come into force in January to ban under-14s from opening an account. 

You liked the article ? It mobilized our editorial staff, which lives only on your donations.
Information has a cost, especially since competition from subsidized editorial staff requires greater rigor and professionalism.

With your support, France-Soir will continue to offer its articles for free  because we believe that everyone should have access to free and independent information to form their own opinion.

You are the sine qua non qua non to our existence, support us so that France-Soir remains the French media which allows the most legitimate to express themselves.