Opposition to social media ban scores minor political points at best

Australia's social media age ban is one of the most significant attempts to rebalance the asymmetric power relationship between government and tech.

Success would be an extraordinary achievement given that in the relatively short history of the internet, attempts to restrain or regulate the online world generally flame out or, at best, fade into obscurity.

Nothing is yet assured, and the fracturing of bipartisan support for the ban domestically poses a risk for the Albanese government's plans.

Opposition to the ban

Detractors of the law fall largely into two camps, either they don't want it at all or they think it won't work.

The federal young Nationals became the latest public entrant to the former group — coming out earlier this week to decry the impact of age restricted social media on regional Australians already isolated by geography.

Little can be done by Labor to dissuade this view, other than perhaps some effective communication about the wealth of alternatives still available to young people like messaging apps, games, normal phone calls and texts — noting the entire internet is not being turned off for kids.

Combating efficacy concerns is more difficult, and largely why no-one behind the ban has nominated a clear benchmark for success or failure.

Opposition Leader Sussan Ley has increasingly leaned into the cynicism around the rollout, declaring now she has "no confidence" the ban will work under Labor.

Her political gamble can only end in one of two ways — egg on the face if the laws are broadly effective, or a marginal point scored against Labor if the ban ends up a disaster at the expense of a policy the Coalition was actually first to propose and once strongly supported.

One thing the government appears to have on its side in this regard is the broad support of frustrated parents who are eager to add any tool to their arsenal in the never-ending battle with their children about what constitutes an appropriate level of tech access for their age.

All signs point to these parents giving Labor the latitude to struggle through the initial rollout of the ban with some clunky trial and error.

Because that's fundamentally the biggest challenge with implementing a world-leading law, the only way to learn from mistakes is to make them in the first place.

Governments around the world act

But while Australia may be out in front, a year since the legislation implementing the ban passed parliament the Albanese government is far from alone.

Last month Malaysia announced all social media platforms would have to ban users under the age of 16 from January 1.

Two weeks ago the EU Parliament, which represents 26 countries, passed a non-legislative report that would set a minimum age of 16 for social media, while allowing those aged 13 to 15 with parental consent.

The report also called for a ban on aspects like infinite scrolling and auto-play, threatening social media companies with a total EU ban if they don't comply.

Indonesia — a country with about 20 million young internet users — is going through a process to assess platforms as either high or low risk for kids, with plans to implement a mix of a ban and parental consent requirements.

New Zealand has followed Australia's blueprint, while Papua New Guinea has moved to require age verification for users to prove they are over 14.

In Brazil, laws have passed requiring social media companies to implement age verification and link accounts under 16 with their parents.

And in the US, many states have legislated minimum age restrictions for social media though few have taken effect due to legal challenges against them.

For many of these jurisdictions their next steps will be heavily informed by Australia's experience with the looming ban, with the eSafety Commission already working to share learnings and information with its international counterparts.

It's a terrifying prospect for the tech industry, which has generally succeeded in avoiding major imposts to its operating models by striking early to block isolated attempts at regulation before they could spread.

A child is an economic opportunity 

Had Australia been standing on the eve of implementing social media age restrictions as merely an island on its own, the prognosis for long-term success would be dire.

The social media ban is fuelled by concerns about the social and health harms an increasing body of evidence has linked to functions at the core of these platforms' design.

Tech giants have become multi-billion-dollar behemoths by holding their users' attention and targeting them with advertising using highly sophisticated data collection.

In this context, a child is not merely a child, they're an enormous economic opportunity.

Even if social media platforms don't direct those ads toward their youngest users, they are still collecting and storing valuable information for decades of future monetisation.

Australia has decided to deny those companies the opportunity to cultivate a highly valuable resource from a young age, and the world is following.