Social Media Companies Slam Australia's Under-16 ban

Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP
Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP
TT

Social Media Companies Slam Australia's Under-16 ban

Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP
Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP

Social media giants on Friday hit out at a landmark Australian law banning them from signing up under-16s, describing it as a rush job littered with "many unanswered questions".

The UN children's charity UNICEF Australia warned the law was no "silver bullet" against online harm and could push kids into "covert and unregulated" spaces online.

The legislation, approved by parliament on Thursday, orders social media firms to take "reasonable steps" to prevent young teens from having accounts, AFP reported. It is due to come into effect after a year.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the age limit may not be implemented perfectly -- much like existing restrictions on alcohol -- but it was "the right thing to do".

The crackdown on sites like Facebook, Instagram and X would lead to "better outcomes and less harm for young Australians", he told reporters.

Platforms have a "social responsibility" to make children's safety a priority, Albanese said.

Social media firms that fail to comply with the law face fines of up to Aus$50 million (US$32.5 million) for "systemic breaches".

TikTok said it was "disappointed" in the law, accusing the government of ignoring mental health, online safety and youth experts who had opposed the ban.

"It's entirely likely the ban could see young people pushed to darker corners of the internet where no community guidelines, safety tools, or protections exist," a TikTok spokesperson said.

Tech companies said that despite the law's perceived shortcomings, they would engage with the government in shaping how it could be implemented in the next 12 months.

The legislation offers almost no details on how the rules will be enforced -- prompting concern among experts that it will be largely symbolic.

Members of the public appeared doubtful.

"I don't think it will actually change a lot because I don't see that there's really a strong way to police it," 41-year-old Emily Beall told AFP in Melbourne.

Arthur McCormack, 19, said some things he had seen on social media when he was younger were "sort of traumatic".

"I think it's good that the government is on this ban. But in terms of enforcement, I'm not sure how it will be carried out," he said.

Meta -- owner of Facebook and Instagram -- called for consultation on the rules to ensure a "technically feasible outcome that does not place an onerous burden on parents and teens".

- 'Serious concerns' -

But Meta said it was concerned "about the process, which rushed the legislation through while failing to properly consider the evidence, what industry already does to ensure age-appropriate experiences, and the voices of young people".

A Snapchat spokesperson said the company had raised "serious concerns" about the law and that "many unanswered questions" remained about how it would work.

But the company said it would engage closely with the government to develop an approach balancing "privacy, safety and practicality".

UNICEF Australia policy chief Katie Maskiell said young people need to be protected online but also included in the digital world.

"This ban risks pushing children into increasingly covert and unregulated online spaces as well as preventing them from accessing aspects of the online world essential to their wellbeing," she said.

Leo Puglisi, a 17-year-old online journalist based in Melbourne, was critical of the legislation.

He founded streaming channel 6 News, which provides hourly news bulletins on national and international issues, in 2019 at the age of 11.

- Global attention -

"We've been built up by having 13 to 15-year-olds see 6 News online and then join the team," Puglisi said in a statement.

"We have said that this ban seriously risks restricting creativity from our young people, no matter what passion or future career they want to explore," he added.

One of the biggest issues will be privacy -- what age-verification information is used, how it is collected and by whom.

Social media companies remain adamant that age verification should be the job of app stores, but the government believes tech platforms should be responsible.

Exemptions will likely be granted to some companies, such as WhatsApp and YouTube, which teenagers may need to use for recreation, school work or other reasons.

The legislation will be closely monitored by other countries, with many weighing whether to implement similar bans.

Lawmakers from Spain to Florida have proposed social media bans for young teens, although none of the measures have been implemented yet.

China has restricted access for minors since 2021, with under-14s not allowed to spend more than 40 minutes a day on Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok.



Social Media ‘Addicting the Brains of Children,’ Plaintiff’s Lawyer Argues in Landmark Trial

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Social Media ‘Addicting the Brains of Children,’ Plaintiff’s Lawyer Argues in Landmark Trial

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)

Comparing social media platforms to casinos and addictive drugs, lawyer Mark Lanier delivered opening statements Monday in a landmark trial in Los Angeles that seeks to hold Instagram owner Meta and Google's YouTube responsible for harms to children who use their products.

Instagram's parent company Meta and Google's YouTube face claims that their platforms addict children through deliberate design choices that keep kids glued to their screens. TikTok and Snap, which were originally named in the lawsuit, settled for undisclosed sums.

Jurors got their first glimpse into what will be a lengthy trial characterized by dueling narratives from the plaintiffs and the two remaining defendants.

Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt spoke of the disagreement within the scientific community over social media addiction, with some researchers believing it doesn’t exist, or that addiction is not the most appropriate way to describe heavy social media use.

‘Addicting the brains of children’

Lanier, the plaintiff's lawyer, delivered lively first remarks where he said the case will be as “easy as ABC” — which stands for “addicting the brains of children.” He said Meta and Google, “two of the richest corporations in history,” have “engineered addiction in children’s brains.”

He presented jurors with a slew of internal emails, documents and studies conducted by Meta and YouTube, as well as YouTube’s parent company, Google. He emphasized the findings of a study Meta conducted called “Project Myst” in which they surveyed 1,000 teens and their parents about their social media use.

The two major findings, Lanier said, were that Meta knew children who experienced “adverse events” like trauma and stress were particularly vulnerable for addiction; and that parental supervision and controls made little impact.

He also highlighted internal Google documents that likened some company products to a casino, and internal communication between Meta employees in which one person said Instagram is “like a drug” and they are “basically pushers.”

At the core of the Los Angeles case is a 20-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose case could determine how thousands of other, similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials — essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury.

Plaintiff grew up using YouTube, Instagram

KGM made a brief appearance after a break during Lanier’s statement and she will return to testify later in the trial. Lanier spent time describing KGM's childhood, focusing particularly on what her personality was like before she began using social media.

She started using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9, Lanier said. Before she graduated elementary school, she had posted 284 videos on YouTube.

The outcome of the trial could have profound effects on the companies' businesses and how they will handle children using their platforms.

Lanier said the companies’ lawyers will “try to blame the little girl and her parents for the trap they built,” referencing the plaintiff. She was a minor when she said she became addicted to social media, which she claims had a detrimental impact on her mental health.

Lanier said that despite the public position of Meta and YouTube being that they work to protect children, their internal documents show an entirely different position, with explicit references to young children being listed as their target audiences.

The attorney also drew comparisons between the social media companies and tobacco firms, citing internal communication between Meta employees who were concerned about the company’s lack of proactive action about the potential harm their platforms can have on children and teens.

“For a teenager, social validation is survival,” Lanier said. The defendants “engineered a feature that caters to a minor’s craving for social validation,” he added, speaking about “like” buttons and similar features.

Meta pushes back

In his opening statement representing Meta, Schmidt said the core question in the case is whether the platforms were a substantial factor in KGM’s mental health struggles. He spent much of his time going through the plaintiff’s health records, emphasizing that she had experienced many difficult circumstances in her childhood, including emotional abuse, body image issues and bullying.

Schmidt presented a clip from a video deposition from one of KGM‘s mental health providers, Dr. Thomas Suberman, who said social media was “not the through-line of what I recall being her main issues,” adding that her struggles seemed to largely stem from interpersonal conflicts and relationships.

He painted a picture — with KGM’s own text messages and testimony pointing to a volatile home life — of a particularly troubled relationship with her mother.

Schmidt acknowledged that many mental health professionals do believe social media addiction can exist, but said three of KGM’s providers — all of whom believe in the form of addiction — have never diagnosed her with it, or treated her for it.

Schmidt stressed to the jurors that the case is not about whether social media is a good thing or whether teens spend too much time on their phones or whether the jurors like or dislike Meta, but whether social media was a substantial factor in KGM’s mental health struggles.

A reckoning for social media and youth harms

A slew of trials beginning this year seek to hold social media companies responsible for harming children's mental well-being. Executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, are expected to testify at the Los Angeles trial, which will last six to eight weeks.

Experts have drawn similarities to the Big Tobacco trials that led to a 1998 settlement requiring cigarette companies to pay billions in health care costs and restrict marketing targeting minors.

A separate trial in New Mexico, meanwhile, also kicked off with opening statements on Monday. In that trial, Meta is accused of failing to protect young users from sexual exploitation, following an undercover online investigation. Attorney General Raúl Torrez in late 2023 sued Meta and Zuckerberg, who was later dropped from the suit.

A federal bellwether trial beginning in June in Oakland, California, will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.

In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children to its platforms. The majority of cases filed their lawsuits in federal court, but some sued in their respective states.

TikTok also faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states.


AI No Better Than Other Methods for Patients Seeking Medical Advice, Study Shows

AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)
AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

AI No Better Than Other Methods for Patients Seeking Medical Advice, Study Shows

AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)
AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)

Asking AI about medical symptoms does not help patients make better decisions about their health than other methods, such as a standard internet search, according to a new study published in Nature Medicine.

The authors said the study was important as people were increasingly turning to AI and chatbots for advice on their health, but without evidence that this was necessarily the best and safest approach.

Researchers led by the University of Oxford’s Internet Institute worked alongside a group of doctors to draw up 10 different medical scenarios, ranging from a common cold to a life-threatening hemorrhage causing bleeding on the brain.

When tested without human participants, three large-language models – Open AI's Chat GPT-4o, ‌Meta's Llama ‌3 and Cohere's Command R+ – identified the conditions in ‌94.9% ⁠of cases, ‌and chose the correct course of action, like calling an ambulance or going to the doctor, in an average of 56.3% of cases. The companies did not respond to requests for comment.

'HUGE GAP' BETWEEN AI'S POTENTIAL AND ACTUAL PERFORMANCE

The researchers then recruited 1,298 participants in Britain to either use AI, or their usual resources like an internet search, or their experience, or the National Health Service website to ⁠investigate the symptoms and decide their next step.

When the participants did this, relevant conditions were identified in ‌less than 34.5% of cases, and the right ‍course of action was given in ‍less than 44.2%, no better than the control group using more traditional ‍tools.

Adam Mahdi, co-author of the paper and associate professor at Oxford, said the study showed the “huge gap” between the potential of AI and the pitfalls when it was used by people.

“The knowledge may be in those bots; however, this knowledge doesn’t always translate when interacting with humans,” he said, meaning that more work was needed to identify why this was happening.

HUMANS OFTEN GIVING INCOMPLETE INFORMATION

The ⁠team studied around 30 of the interactions in detail, and concluded that often humans were providing incomplete or wrong information, but the LLMs were also sometimes generating misleading or incorrect responses.

For example, one patient reporting the symptoms of a subarachnoid hemorrhage – a life-threatening condition causing bleeding on the brain – was correctly told by AI to go to hospital after describing a stiff neck, light sensitivity and the "worst headache ever". The other described the same symptoms but a "terrible" headache, and was told to lie down in a darkened room.

The team now plans a similar study in different countries and languages, and over time, to test if that impacts AI’s performance.

The ‌study was supported by the data company Prolific, the German non-profit Dieter Schwarz Stiftung, and the UK and US governments.


Meta Criticizes EU Antitrust Move Against WhatsApp Block on AI Rivals

(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)
(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)
TT

Meta Criticizes EU Antitrust Move Against WhatsApp Block on AI Rivals

(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)
(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)

Meta Platforms on Monday criticized EU regulators after they charged the US tech giant with breaching antitrust rules and threaten to halt its block on ⁠AI rivals on its messaging service WhatsApp.

"The facts are that there is no reason for ⁠the EU to intervene in the WhatsApp Business API. There are many AI options and people can use them from app stores, operating systems, devices, websites, and ⁠industry partnerships," a Meta spokesperson said in an email.

"The Commission's logic incorrectly assumes the WhatsApp Business API is a key distribution channel for these chatbots."