cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/36086180
Australians soon facing age checks when viewing adult websites [& search engines, social media, file sharing, etc, etc]
And all service providers/hosts around the world are expected to comply.
Here’s one summary of the looming access control measures.
Reading and understanding all this (and the linked sources) feels so… difficult, obtuse, complex.
Haven’t seen much scrutiny over the “landmark” report released by the government a couple of weeks ago which forms the basis for the practical implementation of this system.
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/age-assurance-technology-trial-final-report
It’s not an academic study from a trusted institution or even just an established think tank, but from an organisation that sort of popped up out of nowhere some years ago which appears to provide paid certification services for age assurance companies, while also evidently offering “research” for governments on the viability of implementing these schemes. They’d previously done a similar report for the UK government, which makes me rather cynical about our government’s motivations in choosing them. The news reporting on its release was a bit strange as it made it sound like the report was quite sceptical, but you don’t need to spend much time looking at it to see it’s very much telling the government what it wanted to hear (given they’d already committed to implementing such a scheme).
The companies people will be required to provide their documents/biometrics to also kind of popped up out of nowhere, and these are the sorts of folks behind them: https://bylinetimes.com/2025/07/31/the-online-safety-act-is-forcing-brits-to-hand-over-personal-data-to-unregulated-overseas-corporations-with-questionable-privacy-records/
I’m pretty sure we criticised it pretty roundly in this Community (or other Communities on this Instance) back when it came out. But yeah, not much serious pushback from established media.
There was the section on media watch where the government disallowed the media from showing any critical views on it for a time.
Wait what? Have you got a link? It at least a date?
6 days ago. Check YouTube media watch.
Found the link.
This is atrocious. It needs more public attention.
Just watched it and yeah, that’s an even more depressing picture of how it was covered. The headlines I’d seen were:
“Social media age verification possible but laden with risks, landmark study warns” (ABC)
“Trial of tech that could be used to keep Australian under-16s off social media finds some errors ‘inevitable’” (Guardian)
Those stories at least didn’t just parrot the government’s spin - trouble is they made the study sound more sceptical/balanced than it is and didn’t question its credibility.
The irony for is I’m not entirely unsympathetic to the cause they’re pushing for this legislation. I don’t think Social Media access to kids is healthy. Hell, I don’t think Social Media access to adults is healthy. I remember when the web was read-only for morons. I’d love to go back to those days. Once any idiot could put their drivel online, they did.
I think some sort of online test/license would be a better solution. Show people the sorts of lights and shiny they’ll experience online. Teach them about misinformation. Teach them about engagement stats and how sites will do anything to keep you there and not go elsewhere. Teach them about verifying sources and checking websites for whether they are trustworthy. Give them an exam and if they pass, they can have a license to go online. Make everyone go through that and if you can pass it at 15, good luck to you. If you fail it at 50, sorry - the web stays read-only to you until you can get it through your thick skull that there are people out there who lie. Not everything you read is true.
Of course, this would probably be just as unpopular as the approach the government is taking. Eh. I don’t have all the answers.
Yep, I’m not against proper age checking as long as it’s developed carefully with a secure/private by design mentality, but this government’s self-imposed deadline and focus on ticking political boxes will effectively put consumer choice and privacy far below the interests of tech companies and age assurance industry investors. It’s looking like a familiar story - outsourcing responsibility for the practical implementation to questionable interests and promising “industry standards” and “safeguards” to protect consumers which are then poorly enforced or not practical to enforce. That’ll replicate the fundamental shortcomings of our privacy regulation more broadly which have made poor policies/practices and data breaches so routine.
Which established media? Nine or Murdoch? I think we can assume by their silence that they have a seat at the table and are getting what they want.