We are too boring for kids for the social media ban

Career networking site LinkedIn has told Australian MPs that ensuring children are included in a proposed social media ban for under-16s is too boring.

“LinkedIn does not have engaging and engaging content for minors,” the Microsoft-owned company said in a presentation to an Australian senate committee.

The Australian government said this will implement “world-leading” legislation Preventing children from accessing social media platforms.

But the companies behind some of the most popular platforms aimed at teens — Meta, Google, Snapchat owner Snap Inc and TikTok — have all objected to the planned law in presentations to lawmakers.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the proposed legislation was aimed at addressing the harm social media was causing to Australian children.

She said it was for “moms and dads” like herself who are “concerned about our children’s online safety.”

The Senate Environmental and Communications Legislation Committee gave participants one day to comment on the bill, which would amend the existing Online Security Act.

His report to the senate says the bill must pass – ensuring that suggestions such as involving young people in implementing the legislation are taken into account.

However, in their responses, the world’s largest technology companies reveal why they are not satisfied with the proposed law.

Google, which owns YouTube, and Meta, Instagram’s parent company, said they needed more time to evaluate the law.

Meta said its current format “will fail to achieve its goal of reducing the burden on parents to manage the safety of teens on social media.”

She also claimed he “ignored the evidence” presented by child safety and mental health experts; This view was also shared by Snapchat in its presentation.

Meanwhile, X (formerly Twitter) questioned the legality of the bill’s proposals.

TikTok Australia said it had “significant concerns” about the bill as proposed.

Like other platforms commenting on the legislation, it said it was “dependent on” an ongoing age assurance trial that is looking at technologies that can effectively check user age.

TikTok Australia and New Zealand’s director of public policy, Ella Woods-Joyce, wrote in the company’s presentation that the bill’s “hasty passage poses a serious risk that could lead to further unintended consequences.”

However, LinkedIn took a different approach; In his presentation, he argued that this was a platform that did not attract the attention of children.

The company stated that the minimum age limit is 16, which means that they will not be able to access this account, and added that child accounts will be removed when they are found.

If LinkedIn can successfully argue that this should not be included in the legislation, it will potentially avoid the cost and disruption of introducing additional age verification processes to the site.

“Regulating LinkedIn’s platform under the proposed legislation would create unnecessary barriers and costs for LinkedIn to undertake age assurance of its members in Australia,” he said.

The Australian government has said it wants to introduce the law before the end of the parliamentary year.

However, experts said the bill’s time frame and current structure did not provide sufficient opportunity for scrutiny.

Carly Kind, the country’s privacy commissioner, said: in a LinkedIn post After appearing at a public Senate hearing on Monday, he said he was concerned about “the widespread privacy consequences of the social media ban.”

Human rights commissioner Lorraine Findlay said the one-day deadline for submitting responses to the law was “wholly inadequate” in a LinkedIn post on Thursday..

“We need real consultations, not just appearances,” he said.

However, the Australian government’s plans have sparked interest elsewhere.

UK technology secretary Peter Kyle he told the BBC He did not rule out similar legislation.