Latest news with #internetregulation
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Minister doubles down on colleague's claim Farage on side of Jimmy Savile
Heidi Alexander has doubled down on her fellow Cabinet minister's claim that Nigel Farage is on the side of 'people like Jimmy Savile'. The Reform UK leader is 'happy for there to be a free for all on the internet', the Transport Secretary said, as she defended Peter Kyle's comments. The Technology Secretary had accused Mr Farage of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers' over Reform's pledge to scrap the Online Safety Act. Asked if she agrees with Mr Kyle's statement, Ms Alexander told Sky News: 'Nigel Farage is, in effect, saying that he is on their side because he's saying he's wanting to repeal the Online Safety Act. 'I think that the position of Reform in saying that they want to repeal the entirety of the Online Safety Act, which is one of the most important pieces of legislation when it comes to the protecting of our children and the safety of young people online, I think that, in effect, what Nigel Farage is saying is that he's totally happy for there to be a free for all on the internet. 'That's not the position of the Labour Government. It's not the position of me. It's not the position of Keir Starmer or Peter Kyle, and that is the point that the Technology Secretary was rightly making yesterday.' Mr Farage has demanded an apology from Mr Kyle, describing the remarks as 'so absolutely disgusting that it's almost beyond belief'. Speaking to Sky News on Tuesday, the minister had said: 'We have people out there who are extreme pornographers, peddling hate, peddling violence. Nigel Farage is on their side. 'Make no mistake about it, if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he'd be perpetrating his crimes online. And Nigel Farage is saying that he's on their side.' Following this, Clacton MP Mr Farage urged people to sign a petition calling for the legislation to be repealed. Writing in the Telegraph, Mr Kyle said proposals to overturn the Act 'makes my blood boil', as he argued repealing it would benefit 'disgusting predators who contact children and groom them online'. He added: 'I make no apologies for putting the interests of vulnerable children ahead of the interests of predators and child abusers – and the Reform leader's ego.' Also writing for the newspaper, Mr Farage said 'all of this is of course a deflection from the real problem with the Online Safety Act', as he raised concerns over ID checks. He added: 'In the name of safety, the Act poses the biggest threat to freedom of speech in this country in our lifetimes. 'In the name of protecting children, the law aims to regulate what adults are allowed to say or see – while doing nothing to make our children safer.' Shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel said making statements about overturning the Bill is 'very lazy' and 'not responsible'. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms such as social media sites and search engines must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. Sir Keir Starmer jumped to defend the legislation from its critics when he met Donald Trump on Monday, telling reporters: 'We're not censoring anyone. 'We've got some measures which are there to protect children, in particular, from sites like suicide sites.' The Prime Minister added: 'I personally feel very strongly that we should protect our young teenagers, and that's what it usually is, from things like suicide sites. I don't see that as a free speech issue, I see that as child protection.'
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Thursday briefing: Everything you need to know about the new internet safety rules
Good morning. From tomorrow social media companies must introduce child safety measures under the Online Safety Act. It is a key moment for a British government attempting, like so many others, to rein in tech firms and prevent children encountering harmful content on the internet. Passed by parliament in 2023, the landmark legislation significantly empowers the regulator Ofcom. Peter Kyle, the science and technology secretary, described the new codes as a 'watershed moment' that turned the tide on 'toxic experiences on these platforms'. Social media companies operating in the UK now risk hefty fines if they fail to take strong action against content that is harmful to children such as pornography or material that encourages self-harm. Another substantial change is the requirement for pornography websites to verify that users are aged 18 or older, using methods such as photo-ID matching, facial age estimation, credit and debit card checks, mobile operator verification, open banking and digital ID wallets. You may never have heard of it, but the act represents a significant step up in internet safety regulation – and overhaul of how we live online – in the UK. To explore why it was introduced, whether it goes far enough, and whether it will even work, I spoke to Dan Milmo, the Guardian's global technology editor. That's after the headlines. Israel-Gaza war | More than 100 aid agencies issued a dire warning that 'mass starvation' was spreading across Gaza and urged Israel to let humanitarian aid in. Environment | A 'clean, healthy and sustainable environment' is a human right, according to judges at the top court of the United Nations, in a landmark advisory opinion about countries' obligations to tackle climate change and the consequences they may face if they do not. US news | Microsoft says Chinese 'threat actors', including state-sponsored hackers, have exploited security vulnerabilities in its SharePoint document-sharing servers, with research indicating that several hundred government agencies and organisations have been breached. UK politics | Reform UK footed the bill for a £350 bottle of champagne at a luxury lunch and a £989-a-night hotel with hundreds of pounds in room service, its election campaign spending data shows. Media | The BBC is to broadcast a series of MasterChef featuring Gregg Wallace and John Torode, filmed before the presenters were dropped after facing upheld allegations over their behaviour. This legislation, which applies to more than 100,000 companies – including major platforms like Facebook, Google, X, Reddit, and OnlyFans – came to be following impassioned campaigning by online safety advocates, Dan Milmo told me. 'Longstanding concerns about the impact of social media on children's mental health is a key driver. But there's also significant worry about social media's effect on adult mental health, including online hate like racial hatred and general abuse,' he says. 'This attempts to regulate social media companies and large search engines, which previously lacked formal oversight.' Crucial figures pushing for the government to act on online safety include Ian Russell, the father of Molly Russell, a teenager who took her own life in 2017 after viewing harmful content online, Dan added. Other influential voices include Baroness Kidron, who has tirelessly advocated for higher standards of children's online safety. There have also been advocates for other aspects of the act, which came into force in 2023 but has taken some time to get up and running, including the footballer Rio Ferdinand, who has spoken powerfully about the mental health impacts of online hate, and the reality TV star Georgia Harrison, a victim of intimate image abuse (sometimes known as revenge porn). How will it work? Ofcom has been given significant new powers to enforce the new rules. 'There's a lot of literature that's already been issued by Ofcom that underpins the act,' Dan said. 'I think that reflects the difficulty in regulating the massive, amorphous thing which is the online world. This isn't like telling the BBC to not show nudity before 9pm. This is about 100,000 companies. While it's obvious that people are still going to see harmful content, this is at least attempting to make a start on that.' Dan explained the new rules don't focus on individual pieces of content but instead mandate robust systems and procedures within companies to tackle harmful content effectively. They also loop in previous legislation on malicious communication online, beefing up hate speech laws and giving regulators greater powers to hold tech platforms accountable for failing to act on abusive or threatening content. He added: 'If companies don't comply, they risk punishments ranging from fines and formal warnings to criminal charges against executives or even being blocked entirely in the UK.' Are these companies ready to comply? Time will tell, Dan said – but the big tech firms do have the money to be able to do so. What about age verification? One of the most controversial elements is the implementation of age verification checks to ensure people who want to access pornography sites are over 18. These age verification requirements will come into force tomorrow, with major pornography providers like Pornhub already committing to putting in place 'highly effective' age-checking measures. 'There has been some backlash over privacy concerns, as confirming one's age implicitly reveals one's consumption of specific content,' Dan said. 'It's worth pointing out that verification methods must comply with UK GDPR standards. A new industry of age-assurance providers, like Yoti, has emerged to facilitate this securely.' Social media companies could also be required to implement age checks if their sites contain harmful content like pornography that can be accessed by under-18s. Social media platforms have to convince Ofcom that whatever measures they put in place to shield children from harmful material are highly effective - and those measures could include stringent age checks. Oliver Griffiths, Ofcom's group director of online safety, said in a statement that 'society has long protected youngsters from products that aren't suitable for them, from alcohol to smoking or gambling … For too long children have been only a click away from harmful pornography online.' Does it go far enough? Campaigners generally feel the act could be stronger. In April, the children's commissioner for England, Rachel de Souza, told Dan that Ofcom was backing big tech over the safety of under-18s, warning that the proposals were too weak. The Molly Rose Foundation, a charity established by the family of Molly Russell, also criticised the measures (pdf) as 'overly cautious'. 'There's definitely a desire to have stronger measures. Peter Kyle, the tech secretary, was speaking this week about putting in a two-hour social media cap to crack down on 'compulsive' screentime. So the government is definitely considering stronger measures to keep children safe online,' Dan explained. The UK isn't alone: Australia is moving to ban social media for all under-16s. 'Many campaigners continue to push for stronger protections, particularly regarding the addictive nature of social media and protections for women's rights and children's safety,' Dan said. There were fears the act would get watered down as part of an effort to get a trade deal with the US. 'But the government comes back every time and says very strongly, 'we will not water down protection of children'. They point out that the act's primary focus is stopping children from being harmed online,' Dan said. Across the Atlantic, where many of the tech giants who will need to comply are based, some in Donald's Trump administration have grumbled about what they see to be far-reaching implications for free speech. However, Dan doesn't believe they will lobby heavily to get it changed. 'It just wouldn't play very well. It would be pretty damaging politically for any government, including the UK, to agree to water down measures that protect children. And I just find it unlikely that tackling child sexual abuse material, for instance, would be something that is a bargaining chip in trade talks.' This act as it is feels like just the start, Dan added, with the government showing signs it is willing to update it if need be. 'Ofcom seems ready for the challenge. They are releasing a lot of codes and a lot of consultations. I think the ultimate test will be whether, let's say in a year's time, children's and adults' experience of the online world is much safer and more comfortable than it is today.' Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion After the death of his father-in-law, Tim Burrows discovered that direct cremation, a service which cuts out middle men and effectively bypasses formal funerals, is on the rise. But what does this trend say about how we mourn now? Tim explores in this wonderful piece. Charlie Lindlar, acting deputy editor, newsletters As a Gen X-er who grew up pre-smartphone, the thought of someone constantly knowing my whereabouts fills me with horror. Yet today, couples frequently turn on the location-sharing function in order to track one another's movements. Leah Harper and her partner tried it for a week. Did their blue dots head to Splitsville? Alex Needham, acting head of newsletters Damian Carrington is always on top of the damage done by plastics, whether it's to our bodies or our planet. Now he digs into how the industry's lobbyists are 'derailing' a global treaty on cutting plastic production in this depressing piece. Charlie When Philippa Barnes was five, her family joined the Jesus Fellowship, a Christian community based in Northamptonshire, in which women were subordinate to men and family relationships suppressed. In a gripping long read, Barbara Speed tells the story of her life in and out of a cult that disfigured the lives of many of its members. Alex Before the the Towie clans, the Made in Chelsea lot and even the Kardashians, there were The Osbournes. Stuart Heritage explores how the show, centred on the recently departed Ozzy, wife Sharon and kids Jack and Kelly, changed TV … for better or for worse. Charlie Football | Aitana Bonmatí's extra-time winner earned a 1-0 victory against Germany putting Spain into the Euro 2025 final against England. Cricket | India's Rishabh Pant was driven off on a golf buggy and left nursing a suspected broken foot having attempted a reverse sweep off Chris Woakes. Fourth Test, day one: India 264-4 Football | Arsenal have finally reached agreement with Sporting for the transfer of Viktor Gyökeres in a deal worth up to €73.5m (£63.7m). 'We have faced hunger before, but never like this' – a quote from inside Gaza on the front page of the Guardian. The Express carries a 'new plea' from Bob Geldof: 'Feed the children of Gaza and their tormented, terrified, broken and panicked mothers'. 'Badenoch pledge to model leadership on state-slashing Argentine president' – that's the Financial Times while the i paper has 'Cancer patients face 'crushing' treatment delays due to doctors strike tomorrow'. 'Hit striking doctors in pocket, says NHS chief' is the top line in the Times. 'Police not ready for summer of unrest' runs the Telegraph's splash headline while the Daily Mail claims Home Office data shows 'Asylum seekers gambling away taxpayer cash'. The Metro has 'England star asked wife: Help me die'. 'Monster of rock … and proud grandpa' – Ozzy Osbourne remembered in the Mirror. Why do we age in dramatic bursts, and what can we do about it? Scientists are beginning to understand that ageing is not a simply linear process. Instead, recent research appears to show that we age in three accelerated bursts; at about 40, 60 and 80 years old. To find out what might be going on, Ian Sample hears from Professor Michael Snyder, director of the Center for Genomics and Personalised Medicine at Stanford University School of Medicine. Michael explains what the drivers of these bursts of ageing could be, and how they might be counteracted. A bit of good news to remind you that the world's not all bad For this week's edition of our games newsletter, Pushing Buttons (sign up here!), Keith Stuart writes on the couples who game together, and how they strengthen their bond through games like Final Fantasy and Animal Crossing. 'There is a lot of romance in experiencing new places together, getting lost and combining skills to help each other out of calamities. There is sweetness in a shared Stardew Valley or Animal Crossing escapade; there is intellectual challenge in quiet evenings with Blue Prince or Split Fiction,' he writes. 'For too long, gaming was seen as the preserve of lonely young men, a hobby too guarded and insular for lovers; now everyone can play and the digital world is opening up.' Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday And finally, the Guardian's puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow. Quick crossword Cryptic crossword Wordiply
Fast Company
18-07-2025
- Fast Company
Internet regulation is entering its hall pass era
Big changes are coming to the web in the days ahead. On July 25, the U.K.'s Online Safety Act will take effect, bringing sweeping changes to how users experience the internet. Within the next week, websites like Reddit and Bluesky will begin asking users to verify their age—either by providing official ID, bank details that prove their age, or a selfie analyzed by age-estimation software. The act mandates that platforms implement 'highly effective' age verification measures to prevent underage users from accessing inappropriate content—whether that's pornography, violent material, or other age-inappropriate content. This follows a Supreme Court decision in June requiring users in Texas to provide personal information to access pornographic websites. There are growing concerns that what began with adult sites could soon expand to more general platforms. 'We can expect trickle-down verification creep,' warns social media expert Matt Navarra. 'First porn, then gambling, then AI content tools, and eventually even comment sections.' Some observers argue that a new era of internet regulation is beginning. They're calling it the 'hall pass era': To go anywhere or do anything online, users will have to hand over personal information to a range of providers. 'This shift towards a more ID-locked web is one of the biggest, messiest evolutions we've seen online in years,' says Navarra. 'The era of the anonymous internet died a long time ago, but pseudonymity remains, and we are watching the death flows of the free internet,' says Myles Jackman, a U.K. obscenity lawyer opposed to the upcoming changes. Carolina Are, a fellow at Northumbria University's Center for Digital Citizens, acknowledges the intent behind age checks but warns that ID-based systems could backfire. She argues they risk exposing users—especially marginalized groups—to privacy violations, given how much data platforms already collect. 'Just look at people being refused entry into the U.S. due to social media posts,' she says. David Greene, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, agrees that the motivations— stopping bots and protecting kids —are understandable. But he calls the proposed age restrictions overly broad and rights-infringing. He notes they could harm adults who depend on anonymity, such as whistleblowers, sex workers, or domestic abuse survivors. Navarra expresses frustration at how open platforms are being forced to bend to a conservative worldview. 'Bluesky requiring official ID is the ultimate irony,' he says. 'This platform literally was born out of Twitter's decentralization dream [of] open, federated, anti-censorship ideals—and now you need a passport to post.' According to Greene, the issue reflects 'not a lot of deep thinking about the nature of the problem.' Are agrees, suggesting the shift favors corporate interests over the public good. 'While [ID tech] has potential, it's being adopted like every other technology: creating a gold rush climate for ID check—private—companies that will expand like tech start ups and with a 'move fast and break things' approach rather than a public sector, do no harm approach,' she says.
BBC News
12-07-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
New online safety rules are here but as tech races ahead, expect changes
It's surely the darkest fear of any mum or dad - losing their child to a world that's out of sight, a place where they can't protect Ghey, Ian Russell, Mariano Janin, Liam Walsh, Ellen Roome, Lisa Kenevan, Hollie Dance and Judy are all parents who believe the internet played a part in the death of their children: Brianna, Molly, Mia, Maia, Jools, Isaac, Archie and they've courageously told us their stories, sharing their pain, partly in the hope of pushing the authorities to regulate what happens on the internet more years of campaigning and political debate, tech platforms will - within weeks - be legally obliged to stop kids seeing harmful content online, including pornography and material encouraging self-harm. They'll be expected to check users' ages, and if they don't, they could be punished with heavy the debate over whether the changes will have the right effect is already raging. In private, the government freely admits the new rules already need an update. So what is going on? Technological advances "If it does what it says it does, it should be really big," said one Whitehall source, with high hopes of the change on the will be responsible for enforcing new child safety rules which will require platforms to check users' ages. These take effect on 25 July - and Ofcom's chief executive, Dame Melanie Dawes, will join me live in the studio tomorrow morning to explain regulator won't tell platforms exactly how to verify users' ages. But it could be sharing a selfie in real time, or checking bank details. Without proving they are 18, a child or teenager should theoretically not be able to see content that might do them measures to make tech firms remove illegal content have already come into force. A senior Whitehall source said: "We have had 20 years with no attention being paid to safety." You can't say that some observers take a very dim view of how much the new rules are going to campaigner said: "If we believed the breathless PR, we could all take to our deckchairs and just enjoy the sun."Rightly or wrongly, the new rules don't cover what kids share with each other on messaging apps, and they don't block risky stunts or challenges or in-app purchases like loot boxes that end up costing some families a as technology races ahead, the rules don't fully cover AI chatbots which are increasingly grabbing kids' Online Safety Act, which was passed in 2023, didn't tackle material that is harmful but legal for adults - not least because of an almighty row in the Conservative Party when they were in was it set up to tackle misinformation or hate, which MPs warned on Friday left serious holes in the new system designed to protect the Online Safety Act is - and how to keep children safe online The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, which investigated the law in the wake of the Southport riots, said internet users were being exposed to large volumes of harmful and misleading content "which can deceive, damage mental health, normalise extremist views, undermine democracy, and fuel violence".MPs in the committee concluded that the Act failed to keep UK citizens "safe from a core and pervasive online harm".Many safety campaigners think the rules simply don't go far enough and that Ofcom has been far too cautious. A former cabinet minister tells me: "I just don't understand their lack of pace or urgency."It took years to get the Online Safety Act passed as law in the first place. Parliament spent a long time grappling with real dilemmas - especially how to protect fundamental rights of free speech and Ofcom took many months to write the codes of practice that have come into force over time. They wanted to create rules that were practical for the tech platforms industry source says Ofcom had been "sensible and grown-up", and while the rules weren't "revolutionary" they were important, positioning the UK between tighter regulations in the EU and a more lax regime in the you look at it, these new laws have been a very, very long time coming. And while Whitehall has been grinding along, technology, and the kinds of experiences we all have online, has been racing had really heard of AI five years ago? Many sources I've spoken to question now if the way the whole system has been designed is the right former minister I spoke to said it was a "category error" to regulate the internet in this way, questioning whether Ofcom was the right body to do the ultimately, Ofcom can only work within the laws MPs set. While we'll be focusing in the studio tomorrow on the effect the new rules will have, there is already an obvious demand among politicians to go education secretary branded the Tories' suggestion to ban phones in schools a "gimmick". The PM said it was "unnecessary". But the House of Lords might back the idea in votes in mid-autumn, pushing the question back to some newly emboldened Labour backbenchers be tempted to support it too? One of them told me if there were a reshuffle, and a new education secretary, "I'd be straight in there to say, ditch the battle, get on the right side of the public and parents, and agree to the Tories' proposal."But I understand there are new measures developed in government that might emerge even before then, shortly after the the age verification measures about to come into force, the cabinet minister in charge, Peter Kyle, wants to shift the conversation towards healthy habits. The Online Safety Act focuses on what we can see on the internet. But Kyle's next focus is on how we use it, considering how some apps could be addictive.A source said: "kids shouldn't have to be grateful they can't see violent porn on their devices… the next debate is about what is healthy online." Ministers are considering how they could protect children from algorithms that "can make kids feel out of control", or drive compulsive behaviour. Proposals on the table include an "app cap", screen time limits, extra rules on live streams, and making more of a distinction between what 13 and 16-year-olds can do legislation is likely to bring in the next round of changes, but right now, as one MP said: "it is stuck somewhere in the system."You can expect the next round of conversations about how governments can protect the public from the worst excesses of the internet while enjoying its incredible opportunities to be part of the political soundtrack of the has changed so many aspects of our lives so fast for the better in recent years. But for too many families, their experiences online have brought terrible pain. Just as our heads might spin trying to understand all the changes, politicians have perhaps struggled to balance the dangers as well as the opportunities, and how they might be called on to protect the happens online is not the usual turf of politics like making ends meet, running schools or hospitals. But just as our virtual lives are an increasing part of our world, they are becoming a bigger part of our political life too. A list of organisations in the UK offering support and information with some of the issues in this story is available at BBC Action Line Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you. BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
RNZ News
11-07-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Australia is quietly introducing 'unprecedented' age checks for search engines like Google
By Ange Lavoipierre , ABC File photo. Photo: Unsplash / Thomas Park Australians will soon be subjected to mandatory age checks across the internet landscape, in what has been described as a huge and unprecedented change. Search engines are next in line for the same controversial age-assurance technology behind the teen social media ban, and other parts of the internet are likely to follow suit. At the end of June, Australia quietly introduced rules forcing companies such as Google and Microsoft to check the ages of logged-in users, in an effort to limit children's access to harmful content such as pornography. But experts have warned the move could compromise Australians' privacy online and may not do much to protect young people. "I have not seen anything like this anywhere else in the world," said Lisa Given, professor of Information Sciences from RMIT, who specialises in age-assurance technology. "As people learn about the implications of this, we will likely see people stepping up and saying, 'Wait a minute, why wasn't I told that this was going to happen?'" From December 27, Google - which dominates the Australian search market with a share of more than 90 percent - and its rival, Microsoft, will have to use some form of age-assurance technology on users when they sign in, or face fines of almost $50 million per breach. The search results for logged-in users under the age of 18 will be filtered for pornography, high-impact violence, material promoting eating disorders and a range of other content. Despite the apparent magnitude of the shift, it has mostly gone unnoticed, in stark contrast to the political and media fanfare surrounding the teen social media ban, which will block under-16s from major platforms using similar technology. As for why so few people have noticed, it may be because the changes took place away from the halls of parliament, in the relatively dry world of regulation. They were contained in a new industry code - one of three registered by eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant in June. All up, the regulator will register nine codes this year, governing the conduct of internet service companies in Australia. The regulator's media release about the new codes made no mention of the new age-assurance requirements, although Ms Inman Grant briefly mentioned the matter in her recent address to the National Press Club. "It's critical to ensure the layered safety approach … including on the app stores and at the device level - the physical gateways to the internet where kids sign up and first declare their ages." Her comments hint at plans for age checks for even more sectors of the internet. Experts are concerned that almost no-one seems to be aware of the shift. "This one has kind of popped out, seemingly out of the blue," Professor Given said. "It's not clear that there is a social licence for such important and nuanced changes," Digital Rights Watch chair Lizzie O'Shea said. "We would argue that the public deserves more of a say in how to balance these important human rights issues." Search engines will have a suite of options to choose from for checking the ages of their Australian users. There are seven main methods listed in the new regulations: They are similar if not identical options to those being considered as part of the teen social media ban, and some of them have been tested as part of the recent age-assurance technical trial, with mixed results. Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) said given the potential privacy impact for millions of Australians, the new rules for search engines may not do enough to keep children safer online. "One of the other concerns that we have is that there's no evidence as to the efficacy of the [age-assurance] technical controls," EFA chair John Pane said. "Based on the separate age-assurance technology trial, some of those results have been pretty disheartening." He also warned the new rules for search engines could be circumvented using virtual private networks (VPNs). "If the ambition of the government is to prevent children from accessing pornography, they're forgetting straight away the skills of these young people," he said. Beyond concerns about the accuracy of age-assurance technology and the VPN workaround, the new search engine rules will still allow users to access adult content simply by not logging in. Logged-out users will instead experience a default safety setting, which will, at a minimum, blur out violent and pornographic images in search results, but likely allow them to avoid the most stringent filters, such as omitting links completely. "This won't stop the teenager who wants to access pornography from accessing pornography … It won't stop the sharing of pornographic images," Pane said. "So really it is more performative than it is effective." The codes are being co-designed by the tech industry and its representative body in Australia, the Digital Industry Group Inc (DIGI), which said the age checks for search engines were part of a bigger picture. "No single measure is completely foolproof," said DIGI's policy director, Jennifer Duxbury. Dr Duxbury said the approach was designed to "introduce layers of protection … to reduce exposure of minors to age-inappropriate and harmful content across the digital ecosystem." Social media platforms and search engines will be the first parts of the internet to introduce age checks for Australians, but they are unlikely to be the last. App stores, messaging services, porn sites and gambling companies are among a long list of players preparing for similar rules to come into effect. Draft versions of the remaining six industry codes covering those services and many more contain obligations for age-checking. The other codes are yet to be approved by the eSafety commissioner, but in the past the regulator has only rejected a proposed industry code because it was not tough enough, meaning the proposed age-assurance rules are very likely to make the final cut. "We would anticipate these mechanisms being deployed very broadly," Pane said. "It looks like it's becoming inevitable." Pane and other digital rights advocates say online age checking may soon be the norm for Australians. "It's the progression of the loss of our right to be anonymous online," he said. "This is very much the new reality, and I think there are significant privacy concerns here." The success of search engines, like social media companies, is built on their ability to create the most frictionless experience possible for their users. Tech experts say it is possible those companies might simply opt to rely on the user data they have already collected in order to guess a person's age. "Big tech players like Google have huge repositories of personal data," Pane said. "Even if they don't have [a user's] name, they know everything else about us from our browsing history and through advertising technologies. "Google may be able to rely upon information that they hold to infer that you are over the age of 18. "I think it's too soon to tell," he said. Search engines have not announced which age-assurance methods they will offer their users. Whatever their choice, Professor Given said many Australians would have no choice but to go along with it, because they relied on the many services connected to their account. "They've got [their search engine] linked with their Gmail and bookmarks - there's a variety of things that they're doing in the Google ecosystem," she said. "For someone who has an account, in order to access that type of functionality, they're going to have to prove their age. "The internet is a core structure in our lives. A spokesperson for Communications Minister Annika Wells said the government welcomed the eSafety commissioner's registration of three new industry codes to protect children from age-inappropriate content. "This is a critical step in implementing the Online Safety Act to keep Australians, particularly young people, safer online, and ensures that industry steps up to the plate to protect their users from harm," the spokesperson said. "This government has made no secret of its strong commitment to online safety for all Australians, while recognising the need to balance this imperative with protecting the privacy of users." - ABC
