LinkedIn: We’re too boring for kids for social media ban
4 min read
LinkedIn has told Australian lawmakers that it should not be included in the country’s proposed ban on social media platforms for children under 16, arguing that the platform is simply too boring for kids to warrant such restrictions. In a submission to an Australian Senate committee, the Microsoft-owned career networking site stated that “LinkedIn simply does not have content interesting and appealing to minors.” The company further emphasized that its minimum age requirement for users is 16, and it removes child accounts when discovered, suggesting that the platform does not pose a significant risk to young people in the context of the proposed legislation.
The Australian government has announced plans to introduce “world-leading” legislation designed to prevent children from accessing social media platforms. This move is part of an effort to protect young Australians from the potential harms of social media, which Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has described as a growing concern for parents. “It’s for ‘the mums and dads’ who, like me, are ‘worried sick about the safety of our kids online,’” Albanese said.
The proposed law has drawn significant attention both domestically and internationally. The legislation, which amends Australia’s existing Online Safety Act, would prohibit children under 16 from using social media platforms, requiring platforms to implement age verification systems to ensure compliance. The Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, which reviewed the bill, has expressed support for the bill, but also suggested that more consultation and engagement with young people be considered before its implementation.
However, several major tech companies that operate some of the most popular platforms among young people have voiced opposition to the bill. Companies like Google, which owns YouTube, Meta (Instagram and Facebook), TikTok, and Snap Inc. have raised concerns about the law’s feasibility and potential consequences. Meta, for instance, argued that the current form of the bill would not achieve its intended goal of reducing the burden on parents to manage the safety of their children online. The company also stated that the bill “ignores the evidence” presented by child safety and mental health experts, a sentiment shared by Snap Inc. X (formerly Twitter) has also questioned the legality of some aspects of the proposed law.
TikTok Australia has been particularly vocal about its concerns with the legislation, with Ella Woods-Joyce, the director of public policy for TikTok Australia and New Zealand, stating that the rushed passage of the bill could have unintended consequences. TikTok’s submission also highlighted that the bill “hinges” on the success of an ongoing age assurance trial that aims to develop technologies to accurately verify the ages of social media users. The company warned that the proposed legislation could disrupt efforts to develop these technologies and could result in further challenges for platforms trying to comply.
In contrast, LinkedIn has taken a different approach, arguing that its platform is not relevant to children in the first place. The company’s submission points out that its minimum age requirement of 16 excludes children from using the platform, and the company removes child accounts when they are detected. LinkedIn also argued that subjecting its platform to additional age verification regulations would create unnecessary costs and barriers for its Australian users, particularly in light of the platform’s minimal appeal to minors. If LinkedIn successfully argues its case, it could avoid the significant disruptions that would come with implementing age verification systems across its platform.
Despite these objections from major tech companies, the Australian government is pushing ahead with its plans to introduce the legislation before the end of the parliamentary year. However, experts have raised concerns about the speed at which the bill is moving through the legislative process. Privacy commissioner Carly Kind expressed concerns on LinkedIn about the widespread privacy implications of a social media ban, while human rights commissioner Lorraine Findlay criticized the one-day window for submissions as “entirely inadequate.” Findlay called for more genuine consultation, rather than the appearance of consultation, to ensure the bill’s provisions are thoroughly examined.
The proposed law has sparked interest in other countries as well. In the UK, technology secretary Peter Kyle recently indicated that similar legislation is “on the table.” Meanwhile, France has already implemented a law that requires social media platforms to block access to children under the age of 15 unless they have parental consent. However, research has shown that nearly half of users were able to bypass this ban using a simple VPN, raising questions about the effectiveness of such measures.
As Australia moves forward with its plans, the global conversation around social media safety for children is intensifying. The country’s efforts to regulate social media platforms and protect minors from potential harm are being closely watched by other nations, with many considering similar steps to address the growing concerns about online safety. The outcome of this legislation could set a precedent for how other countries approach social media regulation and children’s online safety in the future.
About The Author
