Australia accuses major tech firms of ‘failing to obey the laws’ over online child account ban

Category: Education/Family

Listening

Unlocking Word Meanings

Read the following words/expressions found in today’s article.

  1. compliance / kəmˈplaɪ əns / (n.) – the fact of following rules, laws, or instructions
    Example:

    The manager showed a report on the company’s compliance with the new law.


  2. deactivate / diˈæk təˌveɪt / (v.) – to stop something from working or being used, especially an account, system, or device
    Example:

    Last week, the social media app deactivated fake celebrity accounts so they could no longer fool fans.


  3. assurance / əˈʃʊər əns / (n.) – something that makes people feel sure or confident, or removes doubt about something
    Example:

    A reliable online banking system provides assurance, which helps customers trust their bank.


  4. deliberately / dɪˈlɪb ər ɪt li / (adv.) – on purpose, not by accident
    Example:

    She deliberately ignored the call because she was angry and did not want to talk.


  5. onus / ˈoʊ nəs / (n.) – responsibility or duty that someone must take for doing something
    Example:

    The government puts the onus on social media companies to remove false information posted on their sites or apps.


Article

Read the text below.

Australia’s online safety watchdog said it was considering a court case against Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube, alleging they are not doing enough to keep Australian children younger than 16 off their platforms.


Experts say the Australian courts could decide what steps the platforms can reasonably be expected to take under the laws that took effect on December 10, banning young children from holding accounts.


eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant released her first compliance report since those laws took effect, demanding that ten platforms remove all Australian account holders younger than 16. While five million Australian accounts had been deactivated, a substantial number of Australian children continued to retain accounts, create new accounts, and pass platforms’ age assurance systems, the report said.


Inman Grant said in a statement her office had “significant concerns about the compliance” of half of those ten platforms. Her office was gathering evidence against the five that they had not taken “reasonable steps” to prevent young children from holding accounts.


Courts could order fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to comply. eSafety would decide on whether to initiate court action against any platform by midyear.


Age-restricted platforms that aren’t under investigation are Reddit, X, Kick, Threads, and Twitch.


Communications Minister Anika Wells said the five criticized platforms were deliberately not complying with Australian law. “Australia’s world-leading social media laws are not failing, but big tech is failing to obey the laws,” Wells told reporters. “We started with our world-leading social media minimum age. We will continue with our digital duty of care that puts the onus on big tech companies to protect Australians from online harm,” she added.


eSafety had identified “poor practices” such as platforms allowing unlimited attempts for a user to pass their age assurance methods and prompting the user to try to pass the age assurance method even after they declared themselves underage.


Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, told The Associated Press it was committed to complying with Australia’s social media ban. “We’ve also been clear that accurately determining age online is a challenge for the whole industry,” the statement said.


This article was provided by The Associated Press.


Viewpoint Discussion

Enjoy a discussion with your tutor.

Discussion A

  • After five million accounts were deactivated in Australia, some children were still able to keep their accounts. Why do you think some children are still able to keep social media accounts even after platforms remove many of them? Do you think children are usually honest about their age online? Why or why not? Who do you think should take more responsibility in this situation: parents or platforms? Why? Discuss.
  • What reasons might make it hard for platforms to fully deactivate all children’s accounts? Do you think it is possible to completely stop children under 16 from using social media, or will there always be some way around the rules? Why do you say so? In your opinion, what is a realistic goal for these laws if it is not possible to completely stop children from using social media? Discuss.

Discussion B

  • eSafety is considering a court case against some social media platforms because they are not fully following the new rules about age limits. When companies have difficulty following new laws, how should the government handle the situation? Do you think taking them to court right away is the right decision? Why or why not? Discuss.
  • If companies cannot follow new rules right away, is it better to make the rules stricter or less strict? Why? What are the pros and cons of each option? Discuss.