Australia’s plan to ban children from social media proves popular and problematic

Australia’s plan to ban children from social media proves popular and problematic
Short Url
Updated 20 November 2024
Follow

Australia’s plan to ban children from social media proves popular and problematic

Australia’s plan to ban children from social media proves popular and problematic
  • Supporters say social media is doing too much harm to not have an age limit. More about how the ban would work may be known next week when the legislation is introduced in Parliament

MELBOURNE: How do you remove children from the harms of social media? Politically the answer appears simple in Australia, but practically the solution could be far more difficult.
The Australian government’s plan to ban children from social media platforms including X, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram until their 16th birthdays is politically popular. The opposition party says it would have done the same after winning elections due within months if the government hadn’t moved first.
The leaders of all eight Australian states and mainland territories have unanimously backed the plan, although Tasmania, the smallest state, would have preferred the threshold was set at 14.
But a vocal assortment of experts in the fields of technology and child welfare have responded with alarm. More than 140 such experts signed an open letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese condemning the 16-year age limit as “too blunt an instrument to address risks effectively.”
Details of what is proposed and how it will be implemented are scant. More will be known when legislation is introduced into the Parliament next week.
The concerned teen
Leo Puglisi, a 17-year-old Melbourne student who founded online streaming service 6 News Australia at the age of 11, laments that lawmakers imposing the ban lack the perspective on social media that young people have gained by growing up in the digital age.
“With respect to the government and prime minister, they didn’t grow up in the social media age, they’re not growing up in the social media age, and what a lot of people are failing to understand here is that, like it or not, social media is a part of people’s daily lives,” Leo said.
“It’s part of their communities, it’s part of work, it’s part of entertainment, it’s where they watch content – young people aren’t listening to the radio or reading newspapers or watching free-to-air TV – and so it can’t be ignored. The reality is this ban, if implemented, is just kicking the can down the road for when a young person goes on social media,” Leo added.
Leo has been applauded for his work online. He was a finalist in his home state Victoria’s nomination for the Young Australian of the Year award, which will be announced in January. His nomination bid credits his platform with “fostering a new generation of informed, critical thinkers.”
The grieving mom-turned-activist
One of the proposal’s supporters, cyber safety campaigner Sonya Ryan, knows from personal tragedy how dangerous social media can be for children.
Her 15-year-old daughter Carly Ryan was murdered in 2007 in South Australia state by a 50-year-old pedophile who pretended to be a teenager online. In a grim milestone of the digital age, Carly was the first person in Australia to be killed by an online predator.
“Kids are being exposed to harmful pornography, they’re being fed misinformation, there are body image issues, there’s sextortion, online predators, bullying. There are so many different harms for them to try and manage and kids just don’t have the skills or the life experience to be able to manage those well,” Sonya Ryan said.
“The result of that is we’re losing our kids. Not only what happened to Carly, predatory behavior, but also we’re seeing an alarming rise in suicide of young people,” she added.
Sonya Ryan is part of a group advising the government on a national strategy to prevent and respond to child sexual abuse in Australia.
She wholeheartedly supports Australia setting the social media age limit at 16.
“We’re not going to get this perfect,” she said. “We have to make sure that there are mechanisms in place to deal with what we already have which is an anxious generation and an addicted generation of children to social media.”
A major concern for social media users of all ages is the legislation’s potential privacy implications.
Age estimation technology has proved inaccurate, so digital identification appears to be the most likely option for assuring a user is at least 16.
The skeptical Internet expert
Tama Leaver, professor of Internet studies at Curtin University, fears that the government will make the platforms hold the users’ identification data.
The government has already said the onus will be on the platforms, rather than on children or their parents, to ensure everyone meets the age limit.
“The worst possible outcome seems to be the one that the government may be inadvertently pushing toward, which would be that the social media platforms themselves would end up being the identity arbiter,” Leaver said.
“They would be the holder of identity documents which would be absolutely terrible because they have a fairly poor track record so far of holding on to personal data well,” he added.
The platforms will have a year once the legislation has become law to work out how the ban can be implemented.
Ryan, who divides her time between Adelaide in South Australia and Fort Worth, Texas, said privacy concerns should not stand in the way of removing children from social media.
“What is the cost if we don’t? If we don’t put the safety of our children ahead of profit and privacy?” she asked.


Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban
  • Cricket is considered the most popular sport in Afghanistan, representing hope for many Afghans
  • British lawmakers urge national cricket body to boycott Feb. 26 match against Afghanistan

KABUL: Afghans are pushing back against calls to ban their national cricket team from participating in international competitions, saying such a move would not reverse the Taliban’s increasing restrictions on women in the country.

Regarded as the most popular sport in Afghanistan, cricket has represented a rare bright spot for many as they struggle amid a devastating economic and humanitarian crisis sparked by sanctions slapped on them by the Taliban administration following their takeover in 2021.

Since last month, foreign campaigns calling for Afghanistan’s men’s team to be barred from international matches have been gaining traction as a protest against the Taliban restricting women’s access to education, the workplace and public spaces, as well as sports.

This includes British lawmakers urging the England and Wales Cricket Board to boycott England’s upcoming match against Afghanistan in the ICC Champions Trophy, which is scheduled to take place on Feb. 26.

“There are problems in the country — we can’t deny that — but cricket is certainly not one of them,” Ahmad Nadim, a 23-year-old cricket fan in Kabul, told Arab News.

“The national players were among the first ones to criticize the restrictions on girls’ education and they have continuously voiced their support for Afghan women’s rights. Cricket has been a great source of happiness for Afghans and still continues to be one.”

Despite record-setting performances — including high-profile victories against England, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Australia — over the last few years, Afghanistan’s place on the world cricket stage has become increasingly controversial.

After the Taliban disbanded the country’s women’s team following their takeover, most squad members fled to Australia, where they reunited for a match just last week.

Though the International Cricket Council requires member nations to have both a men’s and a women’s team, as Afghanistan kept its status as a full member it triggered boycotts from countries like Australia and England, which have refused to play them in bilateral matches.

Human Rights Watch have also called on the ICC to suspend Afghanistan’s membership “until women and girls can once again participate in education and sport” in the country.

In their home country, Afghans are openly opposing the boycotts and are calling for sports to be separated from politics.

“Afghanistan’s cricket team is all supportive of women’s rights to education because education is the foundation of a strong society and development in the country,” Hasti Gul Abid, an Afghan cricketer who has played for the national team, told Arab News.

“Afghanistan’s cricket reached the current stage with a lot of difficulties,” he said. “The people of Afghanistan have been supporting their national team since day one. Our people contributed to the advancement of cricket as much as the players did.”

As the men’s team’s popularity and victories have brought joy across the country on many occasions, some argue that the squad should not be seen as representatives of the Taliban government.

“The cricket team belongs to the whole country and all Afghans. It represents us all, not a specific political or ethnic group,” said 21-year-old Khanzada Shaheen, who plays in a local cricket team in Kabul.

Banning Afghanistan’s cricket team will not change the Taliban’s policies against women, said Lal Pacha, a fruit vendor in Kabul.

“We all want Afghan girls to return to schools and universities but why punish our cricket team for that?” he told Arab News.

“Let’s say the cricket team is banned from playing internationally, will this change the Islamic Emirate’s policy? There’s no logic in the demand for banning the cricket team.”


Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning
  • Incident took place in Manchester, from where it was live-streamed on social media
  • Man, who held up Israeli flag during broadcast, remains in custody on suspicion of racially aggravated offense

LONDON: A 47-year-old man has been arrested in the UK on suspicion of a racially aggravated offense after a Qur’an was reportedly set on fire.

The incident occurred in the center of the city of Manchester on Saturday and was live-streamed on social media.

It took place in front of the Glade of Light memorial, which was installed to honor the memory of the victims of the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing.

On the live stream, an individual tore out pages of a book appearing to be a Qur’an, before setting fire to each one. He also held up an Israeli flag during the broadcast.

Greater Manchester Police said in a statement that it arrested a man on the same day “on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence.” The man, who has not been named, remains in police custody.

Assistant Chief Constable Stephanie Parker said: “We understand the deep concern this will cause within some of our diverse communities and are aware of a live video circulating.

“We made a swift arrest at the time and recognise the right people have for freedom of expression, but when this crosses into intimidation to cause harm or distress we will always look to take action when it is reported to us.”


Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
  • Trump placed duties of 10 percent on all imports from China, 25 percent on imports from Mexico and Canada
  • Says decision necessary “to protect Americans,” although it could throw global economy into possible turmoil

OTTAWA: Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Saturday Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods in response to tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.

C$30 billion would take effect from Tuesday and C$125 billion in 21 days, Trudeau told a news conference.

China also said it “firmly opposes” the new tariffs imposed on Beijing and vowed to take “corresponding countermeasures to resolutely safeguard our own rights and interests.”

Trump earlier signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico starting on Tuesday except Canadian energy products, which will be subject to a 10 percent duty.

Trudeau warned the tariffs would hurt the United States, a long-time ally. He encouraged Canadians to buy Canadian products and vacation at home rather than in the US.

He said some non-tariff measures, including some relating to critical minerals, energy procurement and other partnerships are being looked at.

Trump also unveiled sweeping measures against China, announcing an additional 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports on top of existing duties.

In a statement on Sunday, China’s commerce ministry slammed Washington’s “erroneous practices,” saying Beijing was “strongly dissatisfied with this and firmly opposes it.”
The ministry said Beijing would file a lawsuit at the World Trade Organization, arguing that “the unilateral imposition of tariffs by the United States seriously violates WTO rules.”

It added that the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation.”

“China hopes that the United States will objectively and rationally view and deal with its own issues like fentanyl, rather than threatening other countries with tariffs at every turn,” the ministry said.

It said Beijing “urges the US to correct its erroneous practices, meet China halfway, face up to its problems, have frank dialogues, strengthen cooperation and manage differences on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect.”


Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
  • Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods, PM Trudeau says
  • China says the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation”

OTTAWA: Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Saturday Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods in response to tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.

C$30 billion would take effect from Tuesday and C$125 billion in 21 days, Trudeau told a news conference.

China also said it “firmly opposes” the new tariffs imposed on Beijing and vowed to take “corresponding countermeasures to resolutely safeguard our own rights and interests.”

Trump earlier signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico starting on Tuesday except Canadian energy products, which will be subject to a 10 percent duty.

Trudeau warned the tariffs would hurt the United States, a long-time ally. He encouraged Canadians to buy Canadian products and vacation at home rather than in the US.

 

 

He said some non-tariff measures, including some relating to critical minerals, energy procurement and other partnerships are being looked at.

Trump also unveiled sweeping measures against China, announcing an additional 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports on top of existing duties.

In a statement on Sunday, China’s commerce ministry slammed Washington’s “erroneous practices,” saying Beijing was “strongly dissatisfied with this and firmly opposes it.”
The ministry said Beijing would file a lawsuit at the World Trade Organization, arguing that “the unilateral imposition of tariffs by the United States seriously violates WTO rules.”

It added that the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation.”

“China hopes that the United States will objectively and rationally view and deal with its own issues like fentanyl, rather than threatening other countries with tariffs at every turn,” the ministry said.

It said Beijing “urges the US to correct its erroneous practices, meet China halfway, face up to its problems, have frank dialogues, strengthen cooperation and manage differences on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect.”
 


Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’

Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’

Zelensky says excluding Ukraine from US-Russia talks about war is ‘very dangerous’
  • Zelensky’s remarks followed comments Friday by Trump, who said American and Russian officials were “already talking” about ending the war
  • Without security guarantees from Ukraine’s allies, Zelensky said, any deal struck with Russia would only serve as a precursor to future aggression

KYIV, Ukraine: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Saturday that excluding his country from talks between the US and Russia about the war in Ukraine would be “very dangerous” and asked for more discussions between Kyiv and Washington to develop a plan for a ceasefire.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press, Zelensky said Russia does not want to engage in ceasefire talks or to discuss any kind of concessions, which the Kremlin interprets as losing at a time when its troops have the upper hand on the battlefield.
He said US President Donald Trump could bring Russian President Vladimir Putin to the table with the threat of sanctions targeting Russia’s energy and banking system, as well as continued support of the Ukrainian military.
“I think these are the closest and most important steps,” he said in the interview in the Ukrainian capital that lasted for more than an hour.
Zelensky’s remarks followed comments Friday by Trump, who said American and Russian officials were “already talking” about ending the war. Trump said his administration has had “very serious” discussions with Russia, but he did not elaborate.
“They may have their own relations, but talking about Ukraine without us — it is dangerous for everyone,” Zelensky said.
He said his team has been in contact with the Trump administration, but those discussions are at a “general level,” and he believes in-person meetings will take place soon to develop more detailed agreements.
“We need to work more on this,” he said, adding that Trump understandably appeared to be focused on domestic issues in the first weeks after his inauguration.

The nearly three-year war in Ukraine is at a crossroads. Trump promised to end the fighting within six months of taking office, but the two sides are far apart, and it is unclear how a ceasefire deal would take shape. Meanwhile, Russia continues to make slow but steady gains along the front, and Ukrainian forces are enduring severe manpower shortages.
Most Ukrainians want a pause in fighting to rebuild their lives. The country faces near-daily Russian attacks on homes, and strikes on power systems have plunged entire cities into darkness.
Millions of Ukrainians have been displaced, unable to return to their homes after vast tracts of the country’s east have been reduced to rubble. Nearly a fifth of Ukraine is now occupied by Russia. In those areas, Moscow-appointed authorities are swiftly erasing any hint of Ukrainian identity.
With Trump back in the White House, Ukraine’s relationship with the US, its largest and most important ally, is also at a tipping point.
In an initial phone call with Trump during the presidential campaign, Zelensky said, the two agreed that if Trump won, they would meet to discuss the steps needed to end the war. But a planned visit by Trump’s Ukraine envoy, Keith Kellogg, was postponed “for legal reasons” Zelensky said. That was followed by a sudden foreign aid freeze that effectively caused Ukrainian organizations to halt projects.
“I believe that, first and foremost, we (must) hold a meeting with him, and that is important. And that is, by the way, something that everyone in Europe wants,” Zelensky said, referring to “a common vision of a quick end to the war.”
After the conversation with Trump, “we should move on to some kind of format of conversation with Russians. And I would like to see the United States of America, Ukraine and the Russians at the negotiating table. ... And, to be honest, a European Union voice should also be there. I think it would be fair, effective. But how will it turn out? I don’t know.”
Zelensky cautioned against allowing Putin to take “control” over the war, an apparent reference to Russia’s repeated threats of escalation during President Joe Biden’s administration.
Without security guarantees from Ukraine’s allies, Zelensky said, any deal struck with Russia would only serve as a precursor to future aggression. Membership in the NATO alliance, a longstanding wish for Kyiv that Moscow has categorically rejected, is still Zelensky’s top choice.
NATO membership is the “cheapest” option for Ukraine’s allies, and it would also strengthen Trump geopolitically, Zelensky argued.
“I really believe that these are the cheapest security guarantees that Ukraine can get, the cheapest for everyone,” he said.
“It will be a signal that it is not for Russia to decide who should be in NATO and who should not, but for the United States of America to decide. I think this is a great victory for Trump,” he said, evidently appealing to the president’s penchant for winners and business deals.
In addition, Zelensky said, Ukraine’s 800,000-strong army would be a bonus to the alliance, especially if Trump seeks to bring home US troops who are stationed overseas.
Other security guarantee proposals should be backed up by sufficient weapons from the US and Europe, and support for Kyiv to develop its own defense industry, he said.
Zelensky also said a French proposal to put European forces in Ukraine to act as a deterrent against Russian aggression is taking shape, but he expressed skepticism, saying many questions remained about the command-and-control structure and the number of troops and their positions. The issue was raised by French President Emmanuel Macron and with Trump, he said.
“I said in the presence of the two leaders that we are interested in this as a part of the security guarantee, but not as the only guarantee of safety,” he said. “That’s not enough.”
He added: “Imagine, there is a contingent. The question is who is in charge? Who is the main one? What will they do if there are Russian strikes? Missiles, disembarkation, attack from the sea, crossing of the land borderline, offensive. What will they do? What are their mandates?”
Asked if he put those questions directly to Macron, he smiled and said: “We are still in the process of this dialogue.”
Following a statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the war has set Ukraine back by 100 years, Zelensky urged Rubio to visit Ukraine.
Rubio “needs to come to Ukraine, first of all, to see what Russia has done,” the Ukrainian president said. “But also to see what the Ukrainian people did, what they were able to do for the security of Ukraine and the world, as I said, and just talk to these people.”