Musk’s X Says Parents Need to Take the Lead on Online Safety, Not Big Tech

A woman holds a smartphone displaying the logo of US social network X (former Twitter), in Nantes, western France, on Nov. 29, 2023. LOIC VENANCE/AFP via Getty Images

Elon Musk’s X Corporation has delivered a strong critique of the Australian government’s proposed social media ban for children under 16.

The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (pdf) is currently subject to a Senate inquiry with an extremely tight deadline.

X corporation said it wanted to record its concern about the “unreasonably short timeframe” given to interested parties to send in submissions to a significant legislative proposal.

“Further, we have serious concerns as to the lawfulness of the Bill, including its compatibility with other regulations and laws, including international human rights treaties to which Australia is a signatory, as further detailed below,” X said (pdf).

“X, as a platform, is not widely used by minors, currently has no lines of business that actively target minors, and does not allow advertisers to target minors.

“In line with our requirement that users must be 13 years of age to access the platform, we are currently examining different age assurance options, while carefully considering the legal global implications and privacy by design principles.”

The bill will subject social media corporations to fines of up to $49.5 million for failing to take “reasonable steps” to stop underage children from accessing their platforms.

The government’s explanatory memorandum on the bill (pdf) states they will require social media platforms to implement “ some form of age assurance, as a means of identifying whether a prospective or existing account holder is an Australian child under the age of 16 years.”

Humans Rights Concern

X said they were especially concerned that the Bill would negatively impact the human rights of children and young people, including their right to freedom of expression.

The social media platform explained that these principles are included in international treaties, such as the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.

“These concerns are shared by leading human rights organisations including your own Australian Human Rights Commission,” X said.

“The Bill is vague and lacks fundamental definitions which are necessary to provide certainty and clarity to those providers that it seeks to regulate, especially alarming in the context that the Bill is setting up a punitive regime.”

‘No Evidence or Research’ Supporting Social Ban: X

X also said there was “no evidence or research” supporting a social media ban as the best solution from a technical perspective or one that balances the rights of young people.

“Indeed, government authorities, including the eSafety commissioner and the children’s commissioner, have previously raised concerns about a ban’s impact on young people,” the company wrote.

Not Enough Focus on Parental Responsibility

X Corporation also raised concerns about the lack of focus on parents, placing the onus on social media companies.

“This singular focus on social media platforms promotes an adversarial approach and fails to incentivise parents and caregivers to take responsibility for the online activities of the young people in their care,” X said.

The social media platform urged the Australian government to think more broadly about “flexible approaches to age assurance” before passing the law “on such an accelerated timescale.”

“We would also encourage far deeper consideration to be given by the Australian government to age verification or age assurance mechanisms at the device or app store level, as the most effective and privacy-protective solution to protect young Australians from accessing inappropriate content online,” X said.

“It is our contention that the Australian government and eSafety should work closely with international regulators and legislators on device or app store age verification options to understand where tensions exist with other regulations and the timing of implementation, including the UK and U.S.”

Tech billionaire Musk also weighed in on the social media ban personally on X on Nov. 21, concerned it could be a trigger for the implementation of a national ID.

“Seems like a backdoor way to control access to the internet by all Australians,” he said on X.

Bipartisan Support

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the Albanese government’s world-leading legislation protects children online.

“The law places the onus on social media platforms–not parents or young people–to take reasonable steps to ensure these protections are in place,” she said.

“Keeping children safe–wherever they are–is a collective responsibility, and the Albanese government is stepping up to play our role.”

While the Coalition has indicated it will support the bill, some backbenchers have raised concerns about digital ID and privacy.

Coalition Shadow Minister Bridget McKenzie did say on Nov. 26 that the opposition wanted to ensure the laws “don’t damage privacy” and make it compulsory for Australians to have digital IDs.

“But we do want strong, robust laws to protect kids under 16 on social media platforms,” she said in Parliament on Nov. 26.