Labour Digital Rights Network

Today, Ofcom said age verification for social media could support a ban on under-16s. It will mean showing your passport, face, bank details or digital ID before being able to post on Instagram. Yet Ofcom and the government refuse to admit one big problem: there's no evidence Australia's equivalent ban is working. Australia's ban has dented account numbers but barely touched usage, and there is no sign of better mental health or safer children, if anything the opposite: - The eSafety Commissioner's own evaluation undertaken by Stanford found that account ownership fell from 52% to 42%, yet use of banned platforms only fell from 86% to 82%. - The same study concluded there had been "little to no change" in children's wellbeing, offline activities or problematic use. - Parents who did not know their child had used social media rose from 23% to 33%, raising serious safeguarding issues. - A seperate BMJ study found that more than 85% of under-16s were still using banned platforms. - An NBER working paper estimates that just 6% of 14–15-year-olds were complying by June. - Complaints about cyberbullying and image-based abuse show no notable change since the ban was implemented. Ofcom has claimed that Australia only required "reasonable steps", while Britain will demand "highly effective age assurance". But that is untested hope, not evidence. Ofcom also admits that no method is robust against circumvention, VPNs remain legal, and already a quarter of children have used a VPN in the past six months. This is a dangerous game, and the consequences fall on the rest of us. Ofcom has admitted that 16- and 17-year-olds will, in effect, need photo ID to get online, even though many don't have it, while many adults will have to scan their faces or upload documents to access social media. The UK's ban is set to start in March, well before Australia's 12 month results or statutory review. We are supposedly learning the lessons from a policy implemented elsewhere, while practically learning nothing.