X has a new argument against the sweeping of minors social media bans this would limit the use of its platform: they interfere with international law.
The social media platform, part of Elon Musk’s group EspaceXissued a submission to the Australian parliament published on Tuesday calling on the government to abandon its efforts to strengthen its ban on social networks for minors. He lamented that proposals to increase pressure on sites to demonstrate efforts to suppress minors’ access are unnecessary, ill-advised, unfair and could violate the right to privacy.
Mr Requiring data, documentation and proof of compliance from non-Australians in other countries could cause problems “for the committee of nations”, the company also warned.
Australia is leading a growing global movement to restrict children’s access to social media, after banning access to sites for under-16s in December. In May, the country fined X $463,000 for failing to comply with child safety measures. The country’s internet regulator, eSafety, first imposed the fine in 2023, saying Elon Musk has taken over Twitter, now X.
X a déjà critiqué le régime de sanctions « excessif » du pays et s’est plaint dans sa dernière communication qu’une proposition visant à augmenter les sanctions contre les individus est « totalement injustifiée et disproportionnée ».
Musk has been a particularly vocal critic of Australia’s proposed law to set the minimum age for social media at 16. “This looks like a backdoor way of controlling access to the internet for all Australians.” he wrote about when the legislation was announced in late 2024. When Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez announced similar measures in February this year, Musk called him a “tyrant” and a “true fascist totalitarian.”
While many digital rights advocates say blanket age bans on social media are “problematic,” information-gathering powers are not the problem, says international law and technology researcher Stefania Di Stefano.
“For me, the total ban on social media on children and minors is problematic from an international human rights point of view,” says Di Stefano. “This is disproportionate to the rights of children to exercise their right to freedom of expression, their right of access to information, their right of association, etc.”
But Julia Hörnle, a professor of internet law at Queen Mary University of London, is skeptical of X’s proposal. “An Australian regulator ordering X to disclose a document relating to its business activities in Australia is perfectly fine,” she told WIRED. “From all the data the social media company has, they can distinguish between Australian and non-Australian children, and therefore confine regulation to Australia.”
