There was a 24 hour window of submission for the Social Media Minimal Age bill.. and I decided to write something straight to the point.
Hello,
I’m disappointed this bill exists. I don’t understand why it’s been rushed, nor why only 24 hours was given for this submission process. This is all very embarrassing.
My primary objection is that “age validation confirmation” is simply a Trojan horse for digital ID. This bill is not acting in good faith; it’s merely a way to slip through a digital identity solution that has been tried and failed repeatedly.
If you want to add a check on any popular social networks that states, “I am 16 or over”, you’re either relying on the honour system and encouraging our youth to lie—potentially fostering a culture of rule-breaking among future voters
OR
You’ll need to validate that people are legitimately over age by verifying their identity & citizenship. This means it isn’t age validation; it’s a digital identity solution, and you’re not even being subtle about it.
The outcome of a system is what it does.
I’ve followed the history of digital identity in Australia and worldwide, and I know the Tony Blair Institute has been trying to kickstart digital IDs for many years without success.
I would be keen to know how many members of the Institute for Global Change lobbyists have been speaking to the government regarding this bill.
Because I have numerous issues with this bill, I will keep this short.
This bill has:
- Insufficient evidence defending its objective, which undermines the rationale for such a restrictive measure.
- No explanation of what problems it is trying to solve or how banning youth from social media will address those problems.
- Removed personal agency from parents and children, giving bad parents a free pass to avoid treating their children with respect and honesty.
- A strange focus on logged-in vs logged-out users when cookies can track and identify people even when logged out.
- Ignored platforms like Roblox, which have significant grooming problems.
- Failed to provide a clear list of what qualifies as a social network (my original idea was to submit a massive list of potential social networks).
I would have preferred a bill forcing social networks used by Australian youth to:
- Remove ads.
- Restrict algorithmic targeting.
- Limit visibility of harmful material such as pro-anorexia groups.
This would have been far more constructive for the youth who are at risk.
This bill should be rejected in its entirety. It’s poorly conceived, and you should feel bad for presenting it.
Please consider drafting a digital bill of rights or introducing an Australian GDPR instead.
Regards,
Ashley Hull
Categories: Uncategorised
Leave a Reply