Social media ban: Expert says PM’s ban is too late for current teens, who argue they will find a way around it

A leading online safety campaigner and former child abuse detective has warned a proposed national ban on social media for under-16s would not benefit current teens — and it appears they agree. Three 14-year-olds told The West Australian they did not believe a ban would work. The girls, all in Year 9, regularly use Snapchat, Instagram and TikTok. “I personally don’t think we can ban it, even if parents are supervising, kids are smarter these days and can learn how to hide it,” Hannah Fraser-Birkett said. “I can delete the app, and when my parents are done looking, I get it back.” Jordanna Malone agreed, adding that using apps such as Snapchat was how teens communicated. “I think even if you do make this ban, kids are just going to go behind everyone’s backs and make fake accounts and lie,” she said. Former WA Police detective Kristi McVee said while she welcomed the Federal Government’s attempt to rein in social media giants, it would have no impact on the current generation. National Cabinet on Friday signed off on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s world-first plan to ban under-16s from platforms such as Facebook and Instagram, with legislation to be introduced when Federal Parliament returns this month. Social media companies would have to take “reasonable steps” to ensure young users are not on their platforms, and face penalties if they do not comply. “Social media is doing social harm to our young Australians, and I’m calling time on it,” Mr Albanese said. The Federal Government was under pressure on Friday to explain how the ban will work, amid concerns some platforms will be handed exemptions and that tech-savvy teenagers will find ways to circumvent age restrictions. There were also unanswered questions about the age verification process, including what types of ID checks would be conducted on users. Ms McVee said she was broadly supportive of a ban, but it would take “years to undo the damage that’s already been done”. “I don’t think we’ll see a cultural change it’s not going to matter until the next generation,” she said. “The kids that don’t have social media that don’t even have a phone yet, they’re the ones who will benefit from this legislation.” She was concerned the definition of social media in the new laws may not include online gaming — a favoured grooming target for predators. “Roblox and Minecraft and any kind of game where they can contact other people and strangers is technically social media, and it’s not going to protect them from that,” she said. The teenage girls said they felt confident enough to manage their own social media use, revealing some of the situations they have encountered online. “If you’re getting bullied you can just block them,” Eden Meerally said. Hannah said her parents were added on her social media so they could see everything she posted. “As long as I don’t add any randos or post anything inappropriate, my parents are fine with it,” she said. “When I was in Year 6, I just got Snapchat and this girl in my year added a boy in the year below and she repeatedly told him to kill himself we all ended up turning on her.” Jordanna said she turned to TikTok when she was sad or had lot on her mind. “I scroll through TikTok and that keeps my mind off it,” she said. “In Year 7 most people get nudes they’re from random people who just add us, but you should just block and report. If you’re getting slandered online, you can just turn off comments and block people. “If there’s a bot or a random old man following me, I’ll just block them.” Jordanna said one of her friends had been added to a group chat where others were abusing her. “They were sending death threats and telling her to kill herself so she tried leaving the chat and they kept adding her,” she said. “I feel like it was a bit wrong of them to keep adding her back it was really unfair because in real life they wouldn’t even talk to her.” Jordanna’s mum Suzie Malone said she thought the ban was a good idea in theory, but was not sure how it could be enforced in practice. “It’s such a huge social connection and their friends are so important to them at this time in their lives, so this medium is something that creates that connection and it has its good sides and bad sides,” she said. “I think it’s a good thing, to restrict kids from being exposed, but we can’t shelter them either, and they will always find a loophole. “We just have to educate them as parents as to what is real, and if they see things to come and talk to us about it.” Leading Australian parenting expert Justin Coulson backed the proposed ban, arguing its advantages far outweighed any disadvantages. The author, speaker and podcast host said the harm that social media caused vulnerable kids was extensive. “I don’t think the upside comes close compared to the downside when it comes to our younger people being involved in these platforms,” he said. While a ban could disadvantage some young people who benefited from access to online communities — such as people with additional needs or autism — he believed it would help more teens than it hindered. He said the downside of social media use included its effect on teens’ mental health, the suicides that have reportedly resulted from online bullying and the increase in scams and frauds. “There’s sextortion, there’s unsolicited nudes, there’s privacy concerns,” he added. “The explicit and inappropriate content that is readily accessible to anybody who has access to a phone.” Dr Coulson said he would have preferred to see the ban set even higher, at 18, but acknowledged that would be even more difficult to enforce. It was difficult to land on the correct age to allow access to social media, he said, as even many adults struggled to manage their exposure. “But in the same way we’ve had to put an age on gambling, alcohol, tobacco, sexual consent, driver’s licences and all those things, you do just have to draw a line in the sand and say this is the age it’s going to be,” he said. Pania Turner, president of peak P&C body the WA Council of State School Organisations, said social media companies should be held accountable. WACSSO was looking forward to seeing more detail about how a workable ban would be imposed. “Overwhelmingly, parents have called for some action to be taken in this space. “The majority of parents would say that they are extremely concerned about the impact social media has on their children.” Premier Roger Cook conceded the ban could be difficult to enforce but said it was important to act on the damage “faceless social media giants” were causing. “There will no doubt be challenges when it comes to implementation but we can’t stand back, say it’s too hard and do nothing,” he said. “I am not the only parent who knows the damage faceless social media giants are causing our community. They are responsible for the platforms they created. That’s why we’re placing the onus on them.”