### 호주의 소셜 미디어 금지 조치: 미성년자 및 기업에 대한 시사점

### 호주, 미성년자 대상 소셜 미디어 금지 조치 시행: 글로벌 선례가 될까요?
* 🌏 Peter는 미성년자의 소셜 미디어 및 기술 접근에 대한 전 세계 정부의 투쟁에 대해 논의하며 **최근 호주의 전면적인 금지 조치**를 중요한 움직임으로 강조합니다.
* 🚫 이전 조치와 달리 이번 금지 조치는 **미성년자의 플랫폼 액세스에 대한 부모의 허가를 허용하지 않아** Meta와 같은 회사로부터 "파시스트적인 조치"라는 강력한 반발을 불러일으켰습니다.
* 📊 한 설문조사에 따르면 **성인의 77%가 정부의 결정을 지지**한다고 답하는 등 금지령에 대한 대중의 지지는 상당하지만, 비판론자들은 시행이 어려울 것이라고 주장합니다.
* 🛠 기업들은 새로운 규정을 준수할 수 있는 **12개월의 기간**이 주어지며, 소셜 미디어 기업이나 앱 스토어 중 어느 쪽이 규정을 주도적으로 시행해야 하는지에 대한 논쟁이 계속되고 있습니다.
* 🇨🇳 중국의 성공적인 사례는 온라인에서 미성년자에 대한 **엄격한 시간 제한**과 같은 잠재적인 방법을 보여 주지만, 호주에서 유사한 조치를 시행하는 것은 다양한 개인정보 보호 문제로 인해 장애물에 직면할 수 있습니다.
* 🧒 Peter는 일부 부모들은 이러한 규제를 환영할 수 있지만, 이러한 접근 방식이 호주를 넘어 이미 유사한 논의가 진행되고 있는 **미국이나 유럽과 같은 지역으로 확대될 수 있을지에 대한 광범위한 의문**이 있다고 지적합니다.
* 🔍 캐롤라인은 전면적인 금지 대신 소셜 미디어 회사가 미성년자에게 더 안전한 환경을 조성할 책임을 져야 한다고 제안하며, **아동의 정신 건강에 미칠 수 있는 부정적인 영향**에 대한 우려를 제기했습니다.
* 💡 현재 사용 중인 알고리즘이 건설적인 해결책이 아닌 유해한 콘텐츠로 어린이를 유도하는 경우가 많기 때문에 **안전 기능 개선**을 위해 기업을 신뢰할 것인지, 아니면 **더 엄격한 규제**를 부과할 것인지에 대한 딜레마는 계속 남아 있습니다.

호주의 미성년자 소셜 미디어 접속 전면 금지 조치는 기술 규제에 대한 전 세계적인 논쟁을 불러일으켰습니다.

PETER JOINS US NOW, YOU HEAD UP
OUR TEAM IN ASIA AND ACROSS THE WORLD OF TECHNOLOGY.
IS THIS A SEISMIC PRECEDENT? PETER:
WE HAVE SEEN GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD STRUGGLE WITH THIS
QUESTION, HOW MUCH ACCESS

SHOULD MINORS HAVE TO SOCIAL
MEDIA AND OTHER KINDS OF TECHNOLOGIES.
THEY HAVE STRUGGLED WITH HOW TO IMPLEMENT THESE CONCERNS AND
ADDRESS SOME OF THEM. WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN AUSTRALIA
IS ONE OF THE MOST DRAMATIC

MOVES YET.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WHERE YOU CAN GET YOUR PARENTS' PERMISSION
AND GET BACK ON. IT IS A BLANKET BAN.
COMPANIES ARE PUSHING HARD

AGAINST THIS.
META HAS OBJECTED TO THIS. FACEBOOK OF COURSE.
IT HAS BEEN CALLED A FASCIST STEP BY THE COMPANY.
THERE IS A LOT OF PUBLIC SUPPORT.
THERE IS A LOT OF SUPPORT WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT.
THEY ARE DETERMINED TO MAKE

THIS STICK. CAROLINE:
IT WAS WIDELY POPULAR. 77% OF ADULTS SUPPORT THE MOVE
ACCORDING TO A SURVEY. EVERY CYNIC WOULD BE LIKE OF
COURSE META IS GOING TO PUSH

BACK AND TIKTOK WILL PUSH BACK.
THEY HAVE GROUNDS TO PUSH BACK BECAUSE THIS IS
VERY HARD TO IMPOSE AND NAVIGATE. PETER:
THERE ARE DIFFICULTIES IN

IMPLEMENTING SOMETHING LIKE
THIS. COMPANIES HAVE 12 MONTHS BEFORE
THEY HAVE TO IMPLEMENT IT. THE GOVERNMENT IS PUTTING THE
BURDEN OF IMPLEMENTATION ONTO THE COMPANIES THEMSELVES.
THERE IS DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER

THE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES
SHOULD TAKE THE LEAD ON THIS OR WHETHER THE APP STORE
OVERSEEN BY APPLE AND GOOGLE SHOULD DO THIS INSTEAD.
THIS WILL BE SQUARELY ON THE COMPANIES TO IMPLEMENT THIS AND
TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO

DO THIS.
IT IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THIS. COMPANIES LOVE TO SAY IT IS
RUSHED, IT IS DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT.
GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS IN THE PAST. THE
QUESTION IS HOW YOU WILL

IMPLEMENT THE TECHNOLOGY. CHINA HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL AT
IMPLEMENTING GUARDRAILS AROUND HOW TEENAGERS USE TECHNOLOGY.
THAT IS A COUNTRY WHERE THE CONCERNS ABOUT PRIVACY ARE MUCH
LESS THAN AUSTRALIA AND THE

U.K..
THERE WILL BE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THEY IMPLEMENT THIS.
IT WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO IMPLEMENT THIS BUT THE
GOVERNMENT IS DETERMINED TO MOVE AHEAD WITH IT. PAUL:
THAT IS WHERE I'M COMING FROM

AS A PARENT ALTHOUGH MY KIDS
ARE GROWN AND OUT OF THE HOUSE AND CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT.
TECHNOLOGICALLY, HOW DO THEY DO IT? IS IT A PIECE OF SOFTWARE THAT
FACEBOOK COULD PUT ON THAT

FIGURES OUT YOUR AGE? PETER:
THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT CHOICES.
I WILL BEGIN WITH ONE EXAMPLE FROM NORWAY.
THEY TRIED TO IMPLEMENT THIS WITH KIDS WHERE THEY TRIED TO
SET A LIMIT ON HOW YOUNG KIDS

COULD GET ONLINE BUT MORE THAN 70%
OF THEM FIGURED OUT WAYS TO GET AROUND IT, THE PARENTS AND
TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES. KIDS ARE OFTEN SMARTER THAN WE
ARE IN TERMS OF IMPLEMENTING

THESE THINGS.
WHEN YOU HAVE SEEN IT DONE SUCCESSFULLY IN PLACES LIKE
CHINA IN PARTICULAR, YOU HAVE TO REGISTER AND HAVE AN ACCOUNT
IDENTIFIED WITH A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL.
IN CHINA THEY DON'T LET KIDS

GET ONLINE AFTER 10:00 AT NIGHT
OR BEFORE 6:00 A.M. IN THE MORNING SO YOU DON'T
HAVE KIDS USING THIS TECHNOLOGY. IT IS SOMETHING FROM A PARENT
STANDPOINT THAT YOU PROBABLY

SEE IS QUITE USEFUL IF YOU ARE
ABLE TO IMPLEMENT IT. CHINA, BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE
CENTRALIZED CONTROL OVER THESE THINGS, LIMITED HOW MUCH TIME
KIDS COULD SPEND ON THINGS LIKE GAMES AND SOCIAL MEDIA.
YOU CANNOT REALLY USE THE SAME

KINDS OF PROCEDURES IN
AUSTRALIA OR THE UNITED STATES. PAUL: YES. IN AUSTRALIA, CAROLINE WAS
GIVEN THE STATISTICS ABOUT THE SUPPORT FOR THIS.
I CANNOT IMAGINE THAT WORKING

HERE.
IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF FOLKS WOULD SAY, "WAIT A MINUTE, THE
GOVERNMENT CANNOT TELL MY KIDS WHAT TO DO.
IT IS UP TO ME AS A PARENT TO DECIDE.
I GUESS AUSTRALIA IS PAST THAT."

PETER:
THE BROADER QUESTION HERE IS WHETHER THIS WILL GO BEYOND
AUSTRALIA INTO PLACES LIKE THE UNITED STATES OR EUROPE.
CERTAINLY IN EUROPE, FRANCE HAS TAKEN THE LEAD.
THEY FEEL IT IS VERY IMPORTANT

TO HAVE GUARDRAILS AROUND HOW
KIDS USE TECHNOLOGY, ESPECIALLY SOCIAL MEDIA.
WE HAVE SEEN LOTS OF HARM DONE TO CHILDREN THROUGH THESE
THINGS. IN THE STATES, YOU HAVE INDIVIDUAL STATES THAT ARE
CONSERVATIVE THAT HAVE DONE

THIS. FLORIDA HAS BEEN THE MOST
AGGRESSIVE IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT PARAMETERS AROUND THIS.
THERE ARE OTHER STATES VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW KIDS ARE
USING TECHNOLOGY. THEY SEE THAT IT IS VERY
HARMFUL.

PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS
AS A PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPERIMENT BEING DONE ON OUR KIDS WITHOUT
OUR PERMISSION AND THEY WANT PARAMETERS AROUND. CAROLINE:
I WILL PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE.

SOMETIMES PEOPLE -- KIDS, FAIRLY -- FEEL VERY ALONE AND NEED SOCIAL MEDIA. UNICEF CAME OUT SAYING
AUSTRALIA'S BAN WOULD PUSH YOUNG PEOPLE INTO DARKER
UNREGULATED PLACES ONLINE.

THEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT THEIR
RIGHTS OF SEVERING ACCESS TO INFORMATION.
INSTEAD OF BANNING CHILDREN, WE SHOULD HOLD SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES ACCOUNTABLE. TO BE FAIR, INSTAGRAM JUST
IMPOSED SAFETY FEATURES FOR 16-YEAR-OLDS

AND YOUNGER PRIVATE ACCOUNTS,
MESSAGING RESTRICTIONS, SLEEP MODE BETWEEN 10:00 P.M.
AND 7:00 A.M. WITH PANDORA'S BOX ALREADY
OPEN, IS THE ONUS ON THE

COMPANIES TO MORE SERIOUSLY
GIVE THE PARENT A WAY OF HELPING CHILDREN USE IT RATHER
THAN TAKING IT OFF THE TABLE AND LACKING ACCESS? PETER:
IT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION.

IS THERE A WAY TO IMPROVE THESE
SOCIAL MEDIA SITES AND MAKE THEM VALUABLE INSTEAD OF
BANNING THEM OUTRIGHT? AUSTRALIA FEELS THEY HAVE
WAITED LONG ENOUGH. IF YOU EXPECT FACEBOOK OR X TO
DO BETTER, THEY WILL NOT DO IT.

YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT OVER THE
PAST FEW YEARS. THERE HAVE BEEN MANY ATTEMPTS
WITH NOT MUCH PROGRESS. THE QUESTION BECOMES THE
ULTIMATUM OF: YOU LET KIDS ON IN HOPES THAT THINGS WILL IMPROVE
OR DO YOU CUT THEM OFF AND PUT

ADDITIONAL PRESSURE ON
COMPANIES TO DO A BETTER JOB OF REGULATING THE CONTENT.
THE ALGORITHMS HERE ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY ARE
NOT LEADING KIDS TO THE SOLUTIONS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
THEY ARE LEADING THEM TO

ADDICTIVE CONTENT, AND WE HAVE
SEEN THAT AGAIN AND AGAIN FROM TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES. CAROLINE:

Australia Bans Social Media for Anyone Under 16

Welcome to the Bloomberg Technology YouTube channel. Subscribe for original series and mini-docs on game-changing technologies, profiles on innovators, live conversations with experts, and breaking technology news & analysis from Bloomberg TV.

Bloomberg Technology

Australia's Ban on Minors' Social Media Access

Governments worldwide struggle with regulating minors' access to social media.

Australia's blanket ban is a dramatic move, unlike previous attempts.

Companies like Meta strongly oppose the ban, calling it a 'fascist step'.

Despite opposition, the ban enjoys significant public and governmental support.

A survey shows 77% of adults support the ban.

Companies face difficulties in implementing the ban within the 12-month deadline.

Debate exists on whether social media companies or app stores should lead implementation.

Companies claim implementation is difficult, but governments have achieved similar regulations before.

China's success in implementing similar restrictions is cited as an example.

Despite challenges, the Australian government is determined to proceed.

Technological Implementation Methods and Challenges

Discussion on the technological methods for implementing age verification.

Norway's attempt to limit children's online access had limited success due to circumvention.

Children often find ways to bypass restrictions.

China's system, requiring registration and limiting access hours, is highlighted.

China's centralized control allows for stricter time limits on gaming and social media.

International Comparisons and Parental Concerns

Doubt expressed about the feasibility of such a ban in countries like the US.

Parental rights and autonomy are questioned in relation to government intervention.

Global Implications and Alternative Approaches

Discussion on whether the Australian model will spread to other countries like the US and Europe.

France's proactive approach to regulating children's technology use is mentioned.

Some US states, like Florida, are also taking steps to regulate children's technology use.

Concerns about the psychological impact of unregulated social media on children are raised.

UNICEF's concerns about the ban pushing children to unregulated online spaces are mentioned.

Arguments for holding social media companies accountable instead of banning children are presented.

Focus on Social Media Companies' Responsibility

Question of whether the onus should be on companies to improve safety features rather than banning access.

Debate on whether improving social media platforms is a better alternative to an outright ban.

Australia's belief that waiting for companies to improve is futile is highlighted.

The ultimatum of allowing access with hope for improvement versus cutting off access and pressuring companies is presented.

Harmful algorithms leading children to addictive content are identified as a key problem.