logo
Will Australia's youth social media ban work? – DW – 07/31/2025

Will Australia's youth social media ban work? – DW – 07/31/2025

DWa day ago
Australia will impose a social media blackout for children under 16 to tackle the growing mental health crisis among young people. But will the ban be effective?
When Australia's government decided to implement a world-first national youth social media ban, it was pitched as an antidote to a growing mental health crisis.
It followed intense debate about the dangers of social media, much articulated in the book, "The Anxious Generation," by Jonathan Haidt. The American social psychologist argues that smartphone-based childhoods and social media are helping to fuel an epidemic of mental illness among teenagers.
As the ban was passed in the Australian Parliament in November 2024, one poll revealed overwhelming support among 77% of Australians. The plan to fine TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X, Instagram and now YouTube, 49.5 million Australian dollars (€27.7 million, $32.3 million) for failing to block young people was supported by 87% of those surveyed. Underage social media users and their parents will not be punished for any violations under the law.
Social media companies, including Elon Musk's X, were predictably unimpressed with a ban that many concede will also be difficult to police.
"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," said a TikTok spokesperson when the bill was passed.
The Australian social media ban partly seeks to protect young people from the cyberbullying, disinformation and illegal content that has riddled social media platforms. But some experts doubt whether prohibition is an antidote to deteriorating youth mental health.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Marilyn Campbell, a professor in the School of Early Childhood and Inclusive Education at the Queensland University of Technology who writes on cyberbullying, warns that little research establishes a "causal" connection between social media and psychological health.
"We know that there's a high correlation between the rise of new technologies and the increase in young people's poorer mental health," she said. "But we don't even know why yet."
One 2023 study sampling social media use in 72 countries found "no evidence suggesting that the global penetration of social media is associated with widespread psychological harm."
Campbell noted that though populist psychology works like "The Anxious Generation" merely draw a correlation between rising youth anxiety and depression and social media use, they have been heavily hyped in the media. Building on the popularity of these ideas, the government is now pursuing a "nice, simple solution," she told DW.
"You don't have to spend any money on it," she said of the ban. "It's not complicated."
Researchers at the University of Queensland note that the limited understanding of how social media impacts young people's mental health means that other influences need to be considered, such as rising "social inequity," "climate anxiety" and "gendered violence."
Campbell suggested that instead of focusing on social media, governments need to "reform the mental health system," adding that "many more school counselors and school psychologists" would help.
"There are lots of things that they could do but that cost money," she added.
The Australian government continues to conflate social media use and the psychological struggles of young people.
"We know that social media is doing social harm, and my government and this parliament is prepared to take action to protect young Australians," said Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Wednesday when announcing that YouTube would be added to the list of banned platforms after initially being excluded.
But social media can also be positive for young people, said Campbell.
Writing for magazine in January, she noted that young people with autism or who are "exploring their sexual and gender identity" can sometimes more easily identify with peers online than in their physical locality.
She added that, like the prohibition of alcohol in the US, a ban just forces the problem underground.
Youth also need to be prepared to live in a "technologically-saturated world," the professor told DW. "We are not doing them any favors by saying, well, you can't be in this world until you're 16."
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
The Australian ban will not come into effect until this December. Trials are underway to address the complex task of enforcing the social media blackout.
Platforms won't be allowed to compel users to provide government-issued ID or digital identification but must provide "alternative age assurance methods" to confirm the age of social media account holders.
One recent study showed that some 80% of people surveyed are concerned about the accuracy of age assurance technologies and potential data privacy breaches.
Some 77% of German respondents to a 2024 poll also said they would either "fully" or "somewhat" support an Australia-like social media ban.
An even higher percentage, 82%, were "absolutely certain" or "somewhat certain" that social media use is in some way bad for children and teenagers.
Several US states are also limiting access to social media, including ensuring greater parental guidance over social media usage. For decades, the US has required tech companies to seek parental consent to access the data of users under 13.
Sweden too is looking to ban access to smartphones in schools due to worries about a decline in both mental and physical health.
In 2024, US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy suggested that warning labels be added to social media platforms, similar to those on cigarettes and alcohol.
This came after a Surgeon General report found some positives with social media use such as "community and connection with others who share identities, abilities and interests," but also "symptoms of depression and anxiety" among adolescents spending 3-plus hours a day on social platforms.
Marilyn Campbell reiterated that social media apps should not be banned, but designed to encourage safer interaction with young people.
"I think that children need to be educated to live in the digital world," she said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Colombian Ex-president Uribe Sentenced To 12 Years House Arrest
Colombian Ex-president Uribe Sentenced To 12 Years House Arrest

Int'l Business Times

timean hour ago

  • Int'l Business Times

Colombian Ex-president Uribe Sentenced To 12 Years House Arrest

A Colombian judge on Friday sentenced still-powerful former president Alvaro Uribe to 12 years of house arrest, capping a long and contentious career that defined Colombian politics for a generation. Uribe, aged 73, received the maximum possible sentence after being found guilty of witness tampering, a legal source told AFP. The sentence, which is due to be publicly announced later on Friday, marks the first time in Colombia's history that a former president has been convicted of a crime and sentenced. Uribe led Colombia from 2002 to 2010 and led a relentless military campaign against drug cartels and the FARC guerrilla army. He remains popular in Colombia, despite being accused by critics of working with armed right-wing paramilitaries to destroy leftist rebel groups. And he still wields considerable power over conservative politics in Colombia, playing kingmaker in the selection of new party leaders. He was found guilty of asking right-wing paramilitaries to lie about their alleged links to him. A judge on Monday found him guilty on two charges: interfering with witnesses and "procedural fraud." Uribe insists he is innocent and is expected to appeal the ruling. A law-and-order hardliner, Uribe was a close ally of the United States and retains ties to the American right. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier decried Uribe's prosecution, claiming, without providing evidence, that it represented "the weaponization of Colombia's judicial branch by radical judges." Recent opinion polls revealed him to be the South American country's best loved politician. In 2019, thousands protested in Medellin and capital Bogota when he was first indicted in the case. On Monday, a smaller group of followers gathered outside the court wearing masks fashioned after his image and chanting: "Uribe, innocent!" The investigation against Uribe began in 2018 and has had numerous twists and turns, with several attorneys general seeking to close the case. It gained new impetus under Attorney General Luz Camargo, picked by current President Gustavo Petro -- himself a former guerrilla and a political arch-foe of Uribe. More than 90 witnesses testified in the trial, which opened in May 2024. During the trial, prosecutors produced evidence of at least one ex-paramilitary fighter who said he was contacted by Uribe to change his story. The former president is also under investigation in other matters. He has testified before prosecutors in a preliminary probe into a 1997 paramilitary massacre of farmers when he was governor of the western Antioquia department. A complaint has also been filed against him in Argentina, where universal jurisdiction allows for the prosecution of crimes committed anywhere in the world. That complaint stems from Uribe's alleged involvement in the more than 6,000 executions and forced disappearances of civilians by the Colombian military when he was president. Uribe insists his trial is a product of "political vengeance."

Palestinian territories: What makes a state, a state? – DW – 08/01/2025
Palestinian territories: What makes a state, a state? – DW – 08/01/2025

DW

time2 hours ago

  • DW

Palestinian territories: What makes a state, a state? – DW – 08/01/2025

The question of Palestinian statehood continues to draw support, with more and more countries willing to recognize Palestine. But the pathway to statehood is built on conventions and custom — and is rarely allies of Israel are increasingly recognizing — or positioning themselves to acknowledge — the existence of Palestine as a state. The Palestinian territories are the focal point of the current conflict between Israel and Hamas. The moves by nations like France, Canada and potentially the United Kingdolm to recognize a Palestinian state, joining around 150 others, will not necessarily bring an end to the war or secure territorial borders. That, as with many other statehood disputes, is because recognized statehood is not a straightforward process. There are states of all shapes, sizes and structures; 193 are currently full members of the United Nations. But not having full UN membership does not preclude those states from participating in the functions of the organization, joining other international bodies and even having diplomatic missions. Nor is UN membership even required to be a state. One of the simplest guides for statehood is outlined in the Convention on Rights and Duties of States — the Montevideo Convention — signed in 1933. It lists four criteria for statehood: defined territorial boundaries, a permanent population, a government representing those people and the ability to enter into international agreements. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video It is sometimes said that a state exists when it's recognized by enough people outside its own territory. While recognition isn't a literal part of international conventions, Gezim Visoka, a peace and conflict studies scholar and statehood expert at Dublin City University, Ireland, said it effectively exists through other measures. "Recognition is crucial for a state to function, to exist internationally, to enter international agreements, to benefit from international treaties, protection from annexation, occupations and other forms of arbitrary intervention from abroad," said Visoka. "You're in a better place than if you're not recognized." Recognition of statehood or fulfilling the Montevideo criteria does not automatically lead to UN admission. The process of becoming a member requires a candidate state to follow several steps: a letter to the UN secretary-general, a formal declaration accepting the UN Charter's membership obligations and the support of the secretary-general. And then, the candidate state must gain the support of members of the UN Security Council. That includes nine of the 15 council members voting in favor of the candidate, and all five of the permanent members: China, France, Russia, the UK and US. Historically, this has been a difficult barrier for candidate states to pass, even for those that have a high level of recognition. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 videoPalestine, Kosovo and Western Sahara are among states with extensive recognition but that aren't full UN members. "When Montenegro joined the UN, or Croatia [joined], they had less than 70 recognitions," said Visoka. "Whereas Palestine has almost 150, Kosovo has around 180-190 recognitions, Western Sahara has over 50." However, if this barrier is passed, a candidate need only receive a two-thirds majority vote of all other UN members at the General Assembly. Outside of the 193 member states are two current permanent observers to the United Nations: the Holy See and Palestine. They are able to access the majority of UN meetings and documentation and maintain missions at UN headquarters. Not being a full member of the UN does not prevent non-members from participating in other bodies. Palestine is, for instance, listed as a state entitled to appear before the International Court of Justice. Some long-recognized states have resisted joining the UN. Switzerland, for example, spent 56 years as a permanent observer before finally joining as a full member in 2002. But the benefits of being in the UN are clear. It effectively acts as de facto recognition, providing sovereign integrity in the event of derecognition by one or more states, and a basis for equality irrespective of size and strength. "On the other hand, non-membership is really tricky," said Visoka, "You don't enjoy the same access to agencies and programs, you might be exposed to mistreatment, isolation and unequal trade and economic relations." So too the risk that territory could be lost. Visoka pointed to recent examples of Western Sahara and Nagorno-Karabakh. States can be recognized by others, but still can face challenges. Places like the Palestinian territories and Kosovo are widely recognized as states, but still face challenges. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The fact that they haven't received approval to become full members of the UN "doesn't make [them] less of a state than other states," said Visoka. But state recognition is a flexible and fluid process. "Unfortunately, recognition remains the weakest part of international law, so there is no treaty, there is no regulation on who is a state, who has the right to recognize other states and which entities are candidates for recognition and statehood," said Visoka. "It is very much defined on a case-by-case basis. All the states don't have unified recognition policy, so they improvise, they adjust and change." This can lead to violence and conflicts, as states fight to gain recognition and legitimacy in the eyes of other nations, with recent examples including the conflict-borne emergence of Kosovo and South Sudan.

How Trump's high tariffs against Brazil could backfire – DW – 08/01/2025
How Trump's high tariffs against Brazil could backfire – DW – 08/01/2025

DW

time2 hours ago

  • DW

How Trump's high tariffs against Brazil could backfire – DW – 08/01/2025

Brazil will pay as much as 50% tariffs on goods exported to the United States. But experts say the tariffs, along with sanctions on a Brazilian judge, indicate this isn't about economics but about Trump's politics. The newly announced tariffs by the US government on Brazilian imports, as well as Washington's move to sanction Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes "for serious human rights abuse," has caused a strong reaction in Brazil. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has condemned American interference in the Brazilian legal system, calling it "unacceptable." The political motivation behind these measures undermines Brazil's sovereignty and threatens the relationship between the two countries, Lula said. From August 6, the US will impose tariffs of 50% on Brazilian imports into America. Somewhat surprisingly, around 700 Brazilian products were exempted. But experts have said this still puts the average tariff on Brazilian goods at around 30%. The European Union and Japan are only paying 15% tariffs. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The US government, under President Donald Trump, has justified its new global tariffs by blaming a bilateral trade imbalance. The Trump administration has also given the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro as an explanation for the punitive tariffs. Judge de Moraes is presiding over the trial of Bolsonaro, who is accused of masterminding a plot to stay in power despite his 2022 election defeat. The personal sanctions on de Moraes come under the US' Magnitsky Act, which allows the American government to sanction foreign government officials worldwide for human rights offenses. Among other things, de Moraes could see any assets he has in the US frozen. The US government had already prevented de Moraes and other Brazilian Supreme Court judges from entering the country. "The Magnitsky Act was previously used against the US' enemies but it always used to have a basis in human rights," said Demetrio Magnoli, a sociologist and foreign affairs columnist in Brazil. "But by using it for the first time against a judge in a democracy, Trump is shattering the human rights foundations of this law." As for the high tariffs, Magnoli told DW it's not unusual for Trump to use tariffs as a weapon in his trade war and deal-making. "But in the case of Brazil, he is using both tariffs and the Magnitsky Act for political and ideological reasons," the commentator noted. "A unique case worldwide and a direct attack on a democratic country and a US ally." Judge de Moraes has been seen as a nuisance by American right wingers since he ordered social media platform, X (formerly Twitter) blocked for several weeks in late 2024. De Moraes demanded that user accounts that violated Brazilian law be removed, part of an attempt to crack down on anti-democratic, far-right voices. Billionaire Elon Musk, the owner of X, tried to get around the court-ordered block and called for de Moraes to be impeached. But de Moraes actually became a target for Trump earlier than that, because of Bolsonaro. In late 2022, the former president was accused of planning a coup against his successor, Lula, something that could carry a sentence of up to 40 years in prison. Bolsonaro and his co-defendants have disputed this charge, and Trump has described it as "a witch hunt." De Moraes has also investigated Bolsonaro for, among other things, manufacturing disinformation and has convicted Bolsonaro's supporters for storming the government district in Brasilia in January 2023. As a result, the judge has been celebrated as a defender of democracy in Brazil, particularly by those on the left. But perhaps because of the parallels to Trump's own past — his supporters also stormed government buildings in January 2021, and Trump previously insisted the 2020 election was "stolen" from him — de Moraes' actions have been like a red rag to Brazil's bullish right wingers, and now also to Trump supporters. However, Guilherme Casaroes, a professor at the Sao Paulo School of Business Administration at the Getulio Vargas Foundation, sees a bright side. The fact that, contrary to his initial announcement two weeks ago, Trump is allowing numerous tariff exemptions means that Brazil did well in negotiations with the US, he said. "But it also clearly shows that Trump's motivation is not so much commercial and more political," said Casaroes. "Especially because Brazil actually has a trade deficit with the US." The expert believes there are three key factors influencing Trump's attack on Brazil. Firstly, the country's closer ties with China, which makes Brazil a battleground in the geopolitical conflict between the US and China. Secondly, this fight is ideological: Trump wants to be seen supporting his allies around the world. That includes Bolsonaro. And thirdly, the economic interests of US tech giants: "They don't want social media regulation," said Casaroes. In Brazil, Trump's onslaught has triggered Brazilian nationalism, especially on social media. That's fair, said sociologist and political commentator Celso Rocha de Barros. He described what he calls the "American intervention against the Brazilian Supreme Court" as "unacceptable imperialist aggression" and insisted that in the future, Brazil must "negotiate economic agreements without giving an inch on democratic and political issues." Rocha de Barros believes de Moraes is actually looking stronger after this episode. Even Supreme Court justices who felt more favorably about Bolsonaro don't want to be giving anybody the impression that they support foreign intervention in their own court, he said. But Demetrio Magnoli believes the US' attacks on de Moraes could actually find favor with parts of the Brazilian population. Many locals are unhappy with their Supreme Court, he pointed out. This is partially because what some think are the judges' too-high salaries, but it's also because of the high penalties meted out to what Magnoli called "the useful idiots of the Bolsonaro camp," those who participated in the January 2023 rioting. Some Brazilians also believe de Moraes became too powerful during the trial against Bolsonaro. In other ways, Trump's attacks actually offers the Brazilian president an opportunity. Lula is polling badly, but if he manages to convince the Brazilian parliament to help an economy badly hit by Trump's tariffs, he might become more popular again. And that would be the opposite of what the US leader was hoping for, Magnoli said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store