Getty Images
Professional networking site LinkedIn has told Australian lawmakers it is too boring for children to justify its inclusion in a proposed social media ban for under-16s.
“LinkedIn simply does not have interesting and engaging content for minors,” the Microsoft-owned company said in a submission to an Australian Senate committee.
The Australian government has announced it will introduce “world-leading” legislation to prevent children from accessing social media platforms.
But the companies behind some of the most popular platforms among young people – Meta, Google, Snapchat owner Snap Inc and TikTok – all challenged the bill in briefs submitted to lawmakers.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the proposed law aimed to address the harm caused by social media to Australian children.
He said it was for “mums and dads” who, like him, were “worried about our children's safety online”.
Other countries are closely monitoring developments in the legislation, with some – including the UK – saying they are ready to follow suit.
The Australian Senate Committee on Environment and Communications Legislation has given respondents one day to comment on the bill, which would amend the current Online Safety Act.
Its report to the Senate concludes that the bill should pass – provided its recommendations, such as involving young people in implementing the legislation, are taken into account.
“Important concerns”
However, in their responses, the world's largest technology companies explained why they were unhappy with the bill.
Google – which owns YouTube – and Meta, Instagram's parent company, said they needed more time to review the legislation.
Meta said its current form “will fail to achieve its goal of reducing the burden on parents to manage the safety of young people on social media.”
He also claimed that he “ignores the evidence” presented by child safety and mental health experts – a view shared by Snapchat in its own submission.
X (formerly Twitter) has questioned the legality of the bill's proposals.
TikTok Australia said it had “significant concerns” about the bill as proposed.
Like other platforms commenting on the legislation, it said it “pivots” to an ongoing age assurance trial involving technologies that can effectively verify users’ ages.
Ella Woods-Joyce, director of public policy for TikTok Australia and New Zealand, wrote in the company's submission that “rushed passage of the bill presents a serious risk of additional unintended consequences.”
But LinkedIn took a different approach, arguing in its argument that it is a platform that simply does not interest children.
The minimum age requirement of 16 means they can't access it, the company said, adding that it deletes child accounts when they are found.
If LinkedIn succeeds in arguing that it should not be included in the legislation, this will potentially avoid the costs and disruption of introducing additional age verification processes to the site.
“Making the LinkedIn platform subject to regulation under the proposed legislation would create unnecessary barriers and costs for LinkedIn members in Australia wishing to purchase age insurance,” he said.
Interest elsewhere
The Australian government has said it wants to introduce the legislation before the end of the parliamentary year.
But experts say the bill's timing and current composition do not allow for adequate review.
Carly Kind, the country's privacy commissioner, said in a LinkedIn post Monday after appearing at a public Senate hearing that she was concerned about “the widespread implications of a social media ban on privacy.” private life”.
Human Rights Commissioner Lorraine Findlay called the one-day deadline for submitting responses to the legislation “totally inadequate” in a LinkedIn post on Thursday.
“We need real consultation, not just appearance,” she said.
Nonetheless, the Australian government's plans have attracted interest elsewhere.
In the United Kingdom, Technology Secretary Peter Kyle told the BBC this month that similar legislation was “on the table.”
France has already introduced legislation requiring social media platforms to block access to children under 15 without parental consent, although research indicates almost half of users were able to circumvent the ban using a simple VPN.
