<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>  
<docID>333990</docID>
<postdate>2024-11-26 07:50:00</postdate>
<headline>Social media giants attack &#8216;rushed&#8217; consult for ban</headline>
<body><p><img class="size-full wp-image-332666" src="https://citynews.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/20241107153326856963-original-resized.jpg" alt="" width="900" height="600" /></p>
<caption>Tech firms have criticised the short time to respond to proposed social media laws. (Lukas Coch/AAP PHOTOS)</caption>
<p><span class="kicker-line">By <strong>Tess Ikonomou</strong> in Canberra</span></p>
<p><strong>Social media companies including Snapchat, TikTok, and Meta have taken aim at the "rushed" consultation process for the proposal to ban children under the age of 16 from their platforms.</strong></p>
<p>Communications Minister Michelle Rowland introduced the world-leading reform to parliament last Thursday, which she said would make the online environment better for young people.</p>
<p>The consultation period for groups and individuals to make submissions closed a day later on Friday.</p>
<p>A senate committee on Monday held a one-day hearing and is due to report back on Tuesday.</p>
<p>The coalition has said it would reserve its final decision on the bill until answers had been received from the government.</p>
<p>In submissions to the inquiry, a number of groups, including social media companies, pointed to the short notice period.</p>
<p>Snap Inc, wrote the "the extremely compressed timeline" had allowed stakeholders little more than 24 hours to provide a response which "severely" constrained thorough analysis and informed debate.</p>
<p>"Due to this rushed process, we have not had  time to set out substantive feedback on crucial elements of the bill," it said.</p>
<p>"We could of course address these in much more detail if this inquiry was afforded more time in keeping with established Parliamentary norms."</p>
<p>X, formerly Twitter, also criticised the "unreasonably short time-frame of one day".</p>
<p>"We have serious concerns as to the lawfulness of the bill, including its compatibility with other regulations and laws, including international human rights treaties to which Australia is a signatory, as further detailed below," it wrote.</p>
<p>Meta, which owns Facebook, wrote there had been "minimal consultation or engagement" and urged the government to wait for the results of the age assurance trial before progressing with the legislation.</p>
<p>TikTok said despite the "time-limited review" there were a range of "serious, unresolved problems" that the government must clarify to ensure there wouldn't be unintended consequences for all Australians.</p>
<p>The proposed laws will come into effect a year from when they pass parliament.</p>
</body>