If under-16s get a social media ban in the UK, Westminster should look closely at Australia

In Australia, it’s already been done. A ban for under-16s came into effect in December. However, it’s still causing controversy.

Before I even arrived in Sydney I saw how divisive the ban had been. From all sides, the new law has been picked apart.

While the legislation was being discussed, many argued the law was aimed more at parents than it was at protecting children from harm.

Milly Rose Bannister is the founder of an organisation called ALLKND, which campaigns on mental health for young people.

She says the ban doesn’t fix the real problem.

“Bans don’t build real-world skills. They don’t build digital literacy. We’re delaying harm, potentially, by a few years but we’re not preventing it at all”.

Now that the ban has come into force, I asked her what sort of change she has seen.

“We hear a lot of anecdotes from our community of young people who find comfort in online spaces, where they can find identity and community and support. The Government spent a year preparing for this legislation to roll out in real life, but we didn’t actually do anything about replacing those lifelines”.

Speaking to young people on the streets of Sydney revealed some surprisingly balanced opinions.

One girl explained “I think it was a good idea, but I just don’t think it was executed right”.

She questioned whether sites like YouTube should have been included, given how much young people learn from video platforms. “We should be focussing on content. What’s being shown. What is allowed to be shown”.

It didn’t take long to find people who were now too young to use social media, but were still able to use it. One boy explained “I got kicked off most, but I still have Insta.”

I asked him about other people he knew, he replied “No one’s banned on Instagram. Like, no one at all”.

The concerns over YouTube’s inclusion in the ban are shared by some lawmakers too. Senator Andrew Bragg, a member of Australia’s centre-right opposition Liberal party, spoke to me about this.

“As one of the millennials in the Parliament, I’m generally aware of how these things work, and I know that YouTube is not social media.”

I asked him whether some of the interactions on YouTube – particularly in the comments left on videos – could be harmful and were something children should be protected from. “I think the whole idea that you can filter the Internet is kind of a bit insane, and not really the approach we go for in a Western democratic society anyway”.

We asked the Australian Government if they would like to comment on what we found, but nobody was available to speak to us.

We asked Meta – the company that owns Instagram – about the claims that young people aren’t being restricted, but they didn’t respond to us.

Other companies – including Google which owns YouTube – also didn’t respond to the points we raised.

Snapchat has described the Australian ban as a “High stakes experiment” and shared some of the concerns about denying young people positive connections in a recent article by their CEO.

If we do get any social media restrictions in the UK, they could could work differently to the law brought in by Australia.

Given the intricacies we’ve seen, though, it’s clear that Westminster should be looking closely at what has happened in Canberra.

____________________

David Harper is a presenter and journalist for LBC News

To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.