Excluding children under 16 from social media will deprive them of important relationships and a political voice.

There are many reasons to be wary, if not outright disagreeing, with the Labor government’s proposed law to restrict children under 16’s access to social media.

On the one hand, the ban does not change the behavior and algorithms used by social media companies or force them to take responsibility for the shared content and harmful actions of their users.

This is the concern of independent MP Zoe Daniel. She said today that the legislation “does not fundamentally change what platforms must do on their platforms, and there could be an unintended consequence that platforms actually become less secure.”

“If you were to create a system where platforms have to take responsibility, mitigate risks and be transparent about how they do it and what tools they use, then that would – potentially – provide an environment in which everyone can be involved. in a safe space.

His independent colleague, Senator David Pocock, is also concerned, but in his case, by the government’s plan to rush the bill through Parliament.

“We need to look at the details of how this is going to work, what will it mean?” » Pocock asked during a radio interview today.

Other senators, from both major parties, have expressed similar concerns and would like to see the legislation subject to a Senate investigation so that it can be properly reviewed – after all, it is complex legislation that could have impact on all Australians if social media users are required to go through age verification, which is a very real possibility.

Senator Matt Canavan of the Nationals puts it succinctly.

“Absolutely, there should be a Senate inquiry,” Canavan said. The Guardian Australia.

“There are serious risks that this legislation will prevent Australian adults from communicating on social media and potentially go too far with young people. The detail will be crucial, which we haven’t seen.

Canavan also likened the ban to “the modern equivalent of banning children from libraries because [there are] some books not suitable for children.

These are all valid concerns, which I share, but what concerns me is how this will also exclude young people from politics.

Whitney Houston was right

It is undeniable that a lot of politics is played out on social media. Politicians of all stripes engage with their constituents on a range of platforms, from TikTok to Instagram, and political discussions take place on platforms like X and Blue Sky.

We know that children under 16, even if they are not yet old enough to vote, are still capable of being intensely involved in politics, and they have every right to be. After all, they will be voters one day, and they are very aware that today’s political outcomes – or failures – will have a much greater impact on them than on the current political ruling class.

According to a 2004 Australian Electoral Commission survey of Australian students (which, admittedly, focused on high school students, but is still likely indicative of older children under 16), teenagers are intensely political even before to be of voting age.

The majority intend to vote at the age of 18 and are certainly well on their way to forging their political identity. They are also already active, with more than half of those surveyed signing petitions, and almost a quarter being active in collecting signatures for those petitions. I would bet those numbers are even higher today, and social media is a key tool for sharing such activism.

A significant number of teens are participating in rallies and other forms of protest, and again, social media plays a key role in allowing students of all ages to organize and make their voices heard.

Take for example climate change and the case of teenage activist Greta Thunberg. Her protests sparked a global movement among students concerned about the world they would inherit when they grew up, and this mass activism led Thunberg to address the United Nations and her climate activism made headlines and newsletters. information from around the world.

Thunberg began sharing her school strikes, via Instagram and Twitter, when she was 15.

Without access to social media, such global grassroots movements would be much more difficult to generate – and these movements are important and can have real, positive political impact. The gun debate in the United States is another example: teenagers of all ages participated in a national school strike in 2018 to protest gun violence in schools.

I honestly believe that our politics will be worse off if young adolescents cannot discover – and participate in – the political discourse of the moment. Removing access to social media will deprive young Australians of the most important modern tools for engaging in politics.