Inquiry into Social Media Ban: Concerns Raised About Children’s Financial Worth to Industry

New South Wales Liberal Senator Dave Sharma brought up the topic of how much revenue tech companies make from advertising to individuals under 18.

This discussion arose during the Inquiry Into Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024—Provisions on Nov. 25.

Bryn Austin, a professor in the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences at Harvard, highlighted from the research that tech companies had significant financial reasons to delay implementing measures to protect children.

Amanda Raffoul, the lead author of the Harvard study, emphasized that social media companies derive significant revenue from young individuals.

Following the study’s findings, which used various methods to determine the value of children on social media, there were calls for increased transparency and governmental regulations to safeguard the well-being of young people.

During the Senate inquiry, Liberal Senator Sarah Henderson mentioned that the app TikTok, owned by a Chinese company, was intentionally designed to be addictive for children.

Sunita Bose, the managing director of Digital Industry Group, faced questions from Sharma about the financial value of Australian child users to the leading social media companies in the country.

She responded, “I cannot provide specific information on behalf of individual companies.”

When asked if she saw her role as preventing legislation that might keep children off social media due to their financial value to the industry, Bose stated, “I respectfully disagree with the characterization of our industry.”

When pressed for data on users under 13 and under 16, Bose admitted she did not have that information.

She consistently emphasized the importance of finding a balance between keeping children away from social media platforms and respecting the privacy of users.

She also pointed out that social media platforms have potential benefits for young individuals, cautioning that if children abandon popular platforms, it could lead to the rise of more unsafe and unregulated online spaces.

Some senators questioned why the industry needed more time to enforce regulations when TikTok had already removed seven million suspected users under the age of 13 in 2021.

Labour Senator Lisa Darmanin asked, “Why is a pause necessary if some companies are already taking action?”.

Bose reverted to the issue of age regulation, mentioning that a trial of age assurance had not been completed yet.

When discussing the need for children to learn how to navigate online spaces, Tasmanian Jacqui Lambie Network Senator Jacqui Lambie accused tech companies of avoiding their responsibilities.

She said, “If you really care about our kids, why don’t you implement the algorithms that can address this? Why don’t you take the initiative and solve it yourselves?”

Meanwhile, People First Party Senator Gerard Rennick expressed concerns that the ban could result in excessive government interference in online activities.

On the Fence

Independent Senator David Pocock, speaking on ABC Radio National, revealed that he was still undecided on whether to support the bill.

He stated, “I’m eager to see how they plan to implement it effectively. I support this concept in principle. This is a societal issue that we must address.”

Pocock also mentioned his concerns about the rushed nature of the policy, suggesting that a more holistic approach is needed to address social media challenges.

He added, “We need a ban to be paired with digital care duties … and what I’ve observed in the misinformation and disinformation bill, which has now been postponed, is a lack of willingness to address the root causes of social media harm, particularly regarding algorithms used by major social media companies.”

Pocock expressed skepticism about the three-day inquiry being sufficient to fully understand the implications of social media problems.