The federal government plans to propose a ban on social media use for children under the age of 16 as part of its highly anticipated online harms bill that will be introduced Wednesday, Global News has learned.
A government source confirmed the plans Monday ahead of the bill’s formal introduction. The source requested anonymity to publicly discuss the bill.
Culture Minister Marc Miller told reporters he couldn’t comment on the contents of the bill before he tables it in the House of Commons.
The Globe and Mail first reported on the forthcoming online harms bill earlier Monday.
The proposed social media ban for youth under 16 would follow action first taken in Australia, where the measure took effect last December.
Other countries including the United Kingdom, Spain and South Korea are considering their own youth social media bans. Malaysia enacted its own ban on social media accounts for users under 16 last week, while Brazil now requires youth accounts to be linked to those of a legal guardian to ensure supervision.
French legislation that would put the social media age limit at 15 was approved by the National Assembly in January and is approaching a final vote, with officials aiming to have it in place for the start of the school year in September.
The idea gained further traction in Canada after Liberal Party members adopted a motion to pursue the policy at their annual convention in April.
That move, and the release of polling suggesting broad Canadian support, prompted Miller to say the government was “very seriously” considering a youth social media ban.
In April, Manitoba became the first province to announce it would move to enact a social media ban for kids. Other provinces, including Ontario, Alberta and New Brunswick, have said they are considering doing the same.
Advocates say such a ban is necessary measure to reign in social media companies who have resisted regulation, and that it could be one tool among many to combat growing evidence of health impacts from screen use and social media among children.
“I feel it’s a common sense approach because the science is absolutely clear on the impact to young people,” said Shimi Kang, a clinical associate professor in psychiatry and mental health at the University of British Columbia and the co-founder and CEO of Future Ready Minds.
Get daily National news
“We can’t let the perfect be the enemy of a start in this conversation.”
How would a social media ban work?
While Kang acknowledged that addressing online harms for youth is more complicated than simply keeping them off platforms, critics say a ban misses the mark.
“I think it’s a very simple approach to regulate what we know are online harms that young people are exposed to,” Christopher Dietzel, a postdoctoral fellow in sociology at Western University and communications studies affiliate associate professor at Concordia University, said in an interview.
However, he added, “It doesn’t actually remove the harm. It does nothing to hold companies accountable for the harms that exist on their platforms. And if these harms are problematic for people who are under 16, they’re likely problematic for people who are over 16.”
Canada’s privacy commissioner Philippe Dufresne said last month when asked about a potential social media ban that such a move shouldn’t come at the expense of ensuring platforms have strong privacy protections.
“I think at the heard of these considerations should be what is in the best interest of children,” he told reporters. “The first step need not necessarily be a ban.”
Enforcing a ban also presents additional privacy risks, experts add.
Under the Australian law, platforms looking to verify a user’s age can either request copies of identification documents, use a third party to apply age estimation technology to an account holder’s face, or make inferences from data already available such has how long an account has been held.
Michael Geist, a professor and Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, said that potential data collection alone is concerning and would need to apply to all social media users regardless of age to be effective.
He noted that it can be difficult to discern between a 15-year-old and a 17-year-old by appearance alone, whether in person or online through biometrics systems.
“So what those systems tend to do then is dig deeper,” he said. “They look at who your friend circle is or the language that you use when posting to try to make a better guess.
“Well, now they’re literally engaging in increased surveillance in order to try (to identify your age), and raising even more privacy concerns in order pull this together.”
Research suggests many Australian teens are evading that country’s ban, while the country’s online safety watchdog said in March that social media companies were not fully complying.
The U.K.-based Molly Rose Foundation released a study in April that found 61 per cent of 12-to-15-year-olds in Australia continue to hold social media accounts despite being banned, while 70 per cent said it was “easy” to circumvent the ban.
Dietzel said taking an abstinence- or prohibition-based approach to youth social media use could create its own harms.
“If they’re using these products illegally, there could be stigma (attached) and it might actually prevent them from seeking help in ways that otherwise they wouldn’t be,” he said.
Advocates, meanwhile, have said a ban would improve children’s mental and physical health while curbing growing online addiction among young people.
“The message this sends to Big Tech is loud and clear: if these companies refuse to take simple steps to make their products safer and less addictive for young people, they should lose their right to target children,” said Josh Golin, executive director of FairPlay, which is pushing for the U.S. to pass legislation aimed at forcing social media companies to do more to protect youth.
Margot Denommé, a former Crown attorney who now leads the group Raising Awareness Against Digital Dangers, told Global News a social media ban could present an opportunity for youth to be educated on online dangers before they begin using these platforms.
“We didn’t need to sitting at our desk smoking to understand that cigarettes cause lung cancer,” she said. “We give youth driver’s education before we put them behind the wheel of a car.
“I believe that we need to take the same approach when it comes to an age minimum (for social media).”
Dietzel agreed that education to prepare youth for social media use, which is part of Australia’s online safety regime, as well as more supports for those who have been harmed online would be beneficial.
But Geitz warned a ban would “just be a band-aid” for the larger problem of social media regulation by putting the onus — and privacy risks — onto Canadians.
“Even if this is a temporary measure, there really is no putting the toothpaste back in the tube,” he said.
“There’s no temporary aspect to it once you’ve built this infrastructure and collected all the data.”
—With files from Global’s Bryan Mullan and Mackenzie Gray
RAISE TO 25 YRS OLD
@bob egerton. Government raised prices and didn’t include wages in that. It takes a lot more work to sustain oneself. Now, think for a moment, if a parent has to work double or triple shifts (worse for a single parent, which was another attack on a healthy household btw), then who is watching the child/ren and for how long and how much? People are burnt out at home to be taking care of children these days. You’re quick to judge the victims, but completely turn a blind eye to the system that is taking advantage of its own people. Honestly? Shame on you for not recognizing the real issue. Your biggest mistake in life is making a friend out of a corporation. I genuinely hope you don’t think votes are truthful. Good luck to you.
Another great liberal idea .a hidden way to collect your personal information ,what you think and do on the computer under the umbrella of “its for the children”
this is just communism ideas used for the new world order the idea government of protecting kids on line for lazy parents. but the reality is, kids will find ways if they want, and this will just collect personal information on everyone that uses social media sites. even more then they are now , it well want your ID . just more data collected for the government and put you at risk
This is stupid, parents need to step up and parent instead the government having to step in! Shame on all you “parents” who let your children become engulfed in screens. I hate you all.
So assuming they manage to make a functional ban, children will become 16 and be able to use social media websites. At what point are they going to be taught not to send naked photos to people they consider friends? And whose responsibility is that?
I remember being taught never to share my age, gender, or location with anyone on the internet. Why are we trying to enforce a ban, instead of teaching children how to safely use the internet?
It should be well noted that the Canadian government wants to ban social media for kids, but not pornography.
Colour nobody surprised.
Teens have grown up with this technology and will easily find work arounds…
Oh look…”Betty and Iris” from the Grandmas Knitting Society are discussing sardine maxxing and the latest Taylor Swift record…”
Sean Webb is Elbows Up no doubt.
We already don’t have news on social media… the pot is already boiling and we don’t notice.
@Jimmy Cooke
EXACTLY !!!! It is creep toward totalitarianism and they use the frog in the pot approach. “Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out.” David Horowitz, and they don’t come any more progressive than Carney and his Liberals.
It starts with something that sounds beneficial. Then once that is accepted and becomes normalized, then the real censorship begins, until the full totalitarian control is established.
How is this going to be enforced ?
It’s no good have laws if they aren’t enforced but look like a good idea on paper. People lie all the time on social media sites
Jimmy Cooke thinks that Doug Ford’s government in Ontario. They are banning smartphones and social media in public education. The premiers are asking the federal government to do this. Including conservative premiers.
You can not keep the kiddees off. But you can use the company’s as a revenue source by fining them. That is really the meaning behind the ban.
Libs ban everything they don’t like or agree with. They will start with Under 16 but 5 years from now Canada will have restricted internet for all like Iran or NK. Carney is an authoritarian.
Hard left Liberal progressive are parasites and typically on the dole.
Not a boo on Global about Trump being booed like the five star piece of cr*p he is. The Americans are coming around. MAGA, your days are numbered and your time is shortening. The wave is coming, the pendulum is swinging back. Love it!
@Duke. Seriously not everything is about Trump or MAGA. You must have OCD
Interesting the comments by Elbows Up Canadians. Those that are responsible and can stand on their two feet and don’t need the Govt to hold their hands are now MAGA. I assume these commenters are on social assistance one way or another.
For the want to be Trucker Convoy/MAGA types here they should be aware that the federal move to ban social media for youth has been asked for by provincial premiers. Including conservative premiers.
@Butch: Then move azzhole
For Duke everything is about MAGA and Trump. Total myopic loser with no guts to speak of.
Who trusts the Government? Only Liberal Elbows Up Canadians on welfare.
I need to find a huge co ck to stuff up my azz. I might have to pay money for it again.
Get the Kids off Social Media.
Put the conversation back at the dinner table.
Canadians should be proud they still have dinner together; a lot of cultures don’t.
This time should be used wisely for the benefit of the future Canadians: and Canada.
God Bless Canada and God Bless us all to take care of each other, no matter who your God are, or are not. Gerald Cullen
Look at these MAGAs crying like little ass. Time to get out your mama’s basement and change your big boy diaper. Keyboard warrior. BTW, internet friends are not real friends. You guys are looser in the real world.
@Buckets. You can admit you are a Dipper. It is obvious.
Just think we now have the privilege of having to sign into social media or more or less everything online, with our government issued ID. Goodbye net anonymity hello government surveillance and data leakage.
Duke is totally clueless. Probably thinks the Govt knows best. Out of touch.
Social media is a scourge on our society. Everyone worried that social media companies will have your ID need to understand they already know EVERYTHING about you. And if them needing your ID forces you to stop using, then that will be a win for you! No lose scenario.
@Marilyn The she man that uses pronouns.
Only cowards want the Govt to take care of things because they are incapable on their own. I prefer choices and freedom
As a conservative, I agree with this 100%
Around the world it is usually Conservatives and their “family values” that does this.
But if Canada does it…they get confused.
But, but, PP didn’t say a peep.
Figures Lexi below thinks Duke’s words below are acceptable.
Hey Lexi, I will win again and besides, nice pension like PP has! How bout you?
The biggest waste and danger to the next generation isn’t smut or porn. It’s reading and listening to a conservative!
It always starts with something that sounds beneficial. Then once that is accepted and becomes normalized, then the real censorship begins, until the full totalitarian control is established.
Lmao
I am pretty certain Duke is trans and uses pronouns.
@Marilyn. Enjoy your time on the Govt Benches as next election you will be gone.
Funny how PP drinkers and Canada haters all talk like “Duke loser” below.
Classy. Brainless. Losers.
They are why I crossed the floor.
@Duke. How does Carney taste. Do you spit or swallow.
I love eating co ck.
Or parents could just… Parent Such a radical idea it seems. Such as: Monitor the phones, computers and other devices. Don’t give them phones with Data on it, have WiFi free hours. Make them stay in the living room where you can see them? Or if you have less free time on your hands, just check em? Have rules like all friends on your apps have to be approved by me?
Like the fact this gains so much traction is mindboggling. Even the CRA has has major data breaches. You want companies to have our IDs? Where any hacker could get it? They have a lot less protection against that as is. Also… if the parent doesn’t approve or they have older siblings just use their ID? ID online doesn’t help anyone, too easy to circumvent. That’s why delivery drivers and such check IDs in person.
And parents should be the one deciding if their kids allowed on social media or not. Not the government.
The problem is not being able to uninstall and limit what gets installed on devices. Stopping the walled garden would let parents have control over the device and prevent kids and adults getting used to access by facial scans by AI which is how age verification is being enforced.
The only way you are going to prevent this is a government issued ID like China does.
Face recognition can be bypassed with video game photos.
Ai exists.
It will be bypassed digitally.
Government ID is the only “socialist” way of proceeding, and you will only known if it works after 2+ years
A government that collects too much in tax revenue to ban cigarette smoking and sales despite innocent third party deaths is going to put age restrictions on the internet as an excuse to identify all citizen activity online like Police carding techniques found the new drug Huey Lewis was looking is beneficial to me as a citizen or taxpayer because…
Why?
I wonder how many parents sacrificed so their children could get a cell phone the government has proposed banning?
How people were about to buy cell phones or sign contracts but will now not be doing that?
How will the government enforce such restrictions without subjecting grown adults to age verification for services they are paying for…
Or maybe they won’t. Maybe our telecommunications industry should have stood against government overreach and violation of basic human principles of privacy.
How many will cancel in protest?
When social media became a thing wasn’t it already designated 16+? What it should be is a $1 million dollar for each under 16 already using t
Carney wants a full blown police state. He was impressed when Trudeau called the EA and froze bank accounts and broke charter rights.
Duke probably on welfare and a neglective parent who expects the Govt to do everything for them. Probably full blown NDP.
Who protect our children from this draconian Liberal Government. Carney is an authoritarian and admires basic dictatorships.
Which is the Liberal moron who came up with this plan. Prohibiting underage drinking or smoking (or drugs) has never worked. This has an even lesser chance of working. They did try it in Australia. It is a roaring failure.
So kids will be grabbing information from adults and sharing it with youtube and other social media to generate fake adult accounts. That sounds like it will be perfectly safe. Now we will have underage surfers, pretending to be adults. Imaging setting up a date with a 30 year old, to find a 12 year old comes to dinner. Yep… perfectly safe.
I stand by the label moron.
In order to “protect our children” everyone will now be required to logon to websites that big governments believe are harmful to your children. Your internet usage, all the websites you visit, and everything you say and do online will be recorded and used against you in the future. If you want to screw something up allow your governments to get involved. Elbozo’s up turkeys!
@Duke.
MAGA living rent free in your head no doubt. Not everything is about Trump.
Denmark and Sweden are also proposing the ban. How did we let it go on for so long including cell phones classrooms. Look how long that took. Totally irresponsible for all involved, parents, teachers, governments, and social media platforms, as to why and how it took so long. Sad!
And, because the Carney Liberals are so fantastic with building policy and strategy as demonstrated by their love letter to billionaire AI entrepreneurs, the Libersls have shown again to have done their research and have calculated the projected loss in jobs, economic activity as what were the numbers?
Not to be Captain Obvious but, kids do not obsess about smart phone and online time because they are desperate to impress their teacher. Its the social aspect both in terms of early adoption of status symbols, but also socializing with peers.
Perhaps out telecommunications will let us know by way of layoffs.
@Duke – Maybe be a parent and regulate what your children are allowed to do online?
You can call everyone MAGA that is against this, but that doesnt change anything. It’s another thing like no news on social media.. They tell you its for one reason, but has a lot of other “benefits” to the government.
Now we can’t share important information, all we get to see is random opinions about what is going on in the news and people take it as fact.
Just would prefer it was its own bill. It should be it’s own separate entity. Don’t like packaging with rest of online harms definitions.
What a wasted effort! Kids will get around this with little effort.
@Cactus – This is a good bill. It helps parent’s like myself regulate kids access to social media until they learn the craziness of the internet. Only brainwashed MAGAs hates this bill.
They say its for the childrens’ safety but its really for spying / finding new taxpayer dollars to steal. Who do they think they’re fooling?
Not up to them to decide what age my kids should be to be able to go on line !!!
Total over reach by an authoritarian government.
Similar to how the government want to monitor and enforce these things on kids, there should be a law to ensure anyone above 65 yrs not to work in government and just retire.
Kids never break rules.
What could possibly go wrong?