# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Film sex and nudity to have age ratings tightened for under-15s, BBFC says

# data[].attributes.body
Regulations at the BBFC and the process they go through to try and make changes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Film sex and nudity to have age ratings tightened for under-15s, BBFC says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scenes that were previously acceptable in films with a 12 rating are now more likely to be rated 15.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Elon Musk replies to post by far-right Austrian linked to Christchurch terrorist after X account restored

# data[].attributes.body
Links to the concept of regulation creating a counter argument for freedom of expression. Morozov and Chomsky.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A far-right Austrian who received donations from and communicated with the Christchurch terrorist before the 2019 attack has had his X account restored, with X owner Elon Musk replying to one of his tweets.

The founder of the so-called Identitarian Movement, Martin Sellner, who preaches the superiority of European ethnic groups, was banned from Twitter in 2020 under the former management along with dozens of other accounts linked to the movement amid criticism over the platform's handling of extremist content.

Sellner was subjected to searches by Austrian authorities in 2019 on suspicion that he was cooperating with the Christchurch terrorist, Brenton Tarrant, and part of a terrorist organisation. Sellner has denied involvement in the attack.

It was revealed that Tarrant had made a €1,500 (A$2,487) donation to Sellner's Identitarian organisation, and that the two had exchanged friendly emails in 2018, including Sellner inviting Tarrant to join him for a beer or coffee if he ever came to Austria.

Tarrant did visit Austria in 2018, but Sellner denies that the pair met.

Sellner praised Musk for restoring his X account last week, where he now has a blue tick associated with paid accounts and has 51,000 followers.

"I'm happy and grateful to be back on Twitter/X. I would especially like to thank Musk for making this platform more open again," he said, according to an English translation of his tweet. "Hope the trend continues and everyone else who has been banned comes back."

After Sellner posted a video related to Swiss police shutting down an event he was speaking at in the Swiss canton of Aargau and stating he had been banned from Aargau for two months, Musk replied "Is this legal?".

Last month it was reported Germany was considering banning Sellner from entry to the country.

Dr Josh Roose, an expert in extremism at Deakin university, said Sellner's account is the latest in a long line of far-right accounts, including the leader of the National Socialist Network in Australia, being allowed back on X under Musk.

"Coincidentally all of them in some way, shape or form interacted with Brenton," he said.

"Now that these groups have come back and since they've been allowed back on the platform, they all follow each other's accounts and they've linked internationally. So that's also enabled the movement to build links and build contacts."

X has been contacted for comment. In a fiery interview with former CNN anchor Don Lemon this week, Musk defended keeping up several antisemitic and racist posts on the platform, stating they were not illegal.

"So, Don, you love censorship, is what you're saying?" Musk said.

Lemon replied that he believed in moderation, to which Musk replied: "Moderation is a propaganda word for censorship."

skip past newsletter promotion
Our Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion

If a post was illegal, "we're going to take it down", said Musk, adding that if it did not break the law, "we're putting our thumb on the scale or being censors".

Roose said while that might meet his reading of freedom of speech in the US, the accounts were originally removed for spreading of hate and attempts to inspire fear online and nothing had changed.

"While it's not surprising, it just signals ... it's an enabling influence that provides these movements with a platform to spread hate."

In January, Australia's eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, revealed that, based on data provided to her by X between November 2022 and May 2023, X had reinstated 6,103 Australian accounts, including 194 that were suspended for violating what was then X's hateful conduct policy.

"A number of these reinstated users were previously banned for online hate," Inman Grant said at the time. If you let the worst offenders back on while at the same time significantly reducing trust and safety personnel ... there are clear concerns about the implications for the safety of users."

X was among half a dozen tech platforms this week issued with legal notices by Australian's online safety regulator asking how they are taking action against extremist and terror-related material on their platforms. Grant said the video from the Christchurch massacre was still circulating online.

The platforms could be issued with fines for failing to respond to the notices within 49 days.

Roose said governments were reluctant to take "real action", and while there had been speculation about Australia following the US in a potential ban of TikTok over security concerns, there was no real threat of X being banned for failing to tackle extremism on the platform, if that is what eSafety's notices find.

"It comes down to the willingness to take decisive action based on leadership and an understanding of the basics and citizenship because you cannot get away in real life we are getting away with online and that is what's corrosive to democracy ... which is meant to be founded on mutual respect and recognition."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Elon Musk replies to post by far-right Austrian linked to Christchurch terrorist after X account restored

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Founder of Identitarian Movement, Martin Sellner, preaches superiority of European ethnic groups and was banned from Twitter in 2020

# data[].attributes.body
Links to the disinformation of news and in particular Russia and its use of media stories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Nearly half of UK families excluded from modern digital society, study finds

# data[].attributes.body
Buckingham and digital literacy etc in there as well for sure but certainly age isn’t the only or main factor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Almost half of UK families with children lack the online skills or access to devices, data and broadband required to participate in today's digital society, research shows, with an expert saying this divide is an "amplifier of other exclusions".

Research shared exclusively with the Guardian found that 45% of households with children did not meet the threshold. Families from low socioeconomic backgrounds in deprived areas and households outside London were among those who were less likely to meet it. Households from minority ethnic backgrounds and those with disabled parents were twice as likely to fall below it.

The research was led by experts at the University of Liverpool, Loughborough University, and the digital inclusion charity the Good Things Foundation, with input from other universities. It used a series of focus groups to develop a "minimum digital living standard" that measures households' digital abilities and their access to goods and services.

"For the first time, we have a benchmark - defined by the public - about what families think is 'enough' to feel included in our digital society today," said Emma Stone, the director of evidence and engagement at the Good Things Foundation.

"Government, businesses and service providers are driving ahead with digital transformation assuming that families are equally able to engage online. Today's research shows this is not true."

The Digital Divide: could you live without the internet?

The lead researcher, Prof Simeon Yates, of the University of Liverpool, said the high proportion falling below this benchmark was disappointing but unsurprising. "People may be surprised, because in every show from crime to romance, people are living a digital life - but we know that a very large number of people don't live in that world.

"Covid shone a very harsh light on this when kids couldn't get access to education ... We're trying to get people to have a grown-up conversation about it: it's not just about having a laptop, it's about connecting to skills, employment, wellbeing," Yates said, labelling the digital divide as "an amplifier of other exclusions" from sectors such as health and education.

The research surveyed more than 1,500 UK households to assess whether they met the benchmark, finding that poverty was a key predictor for falling below it, at a time where Ofcom figures show 28% of households are having difficulty affording the cost of broadband and other communication services.

The report recommends a "holistic" response to boost digital inclusion, calling for public, voluntary and private sector organisations to consider how they can reduce the digital barriers that many face.

Almost four in 10 (38%) of households struggled with online skills, with parents or children, or both, having inadequate functional or critical digital abilities. For parents who lacked functional skills (17%), it could mean being unable to create an email account or make online payments.

skip past newsletter promotion
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion

The research found that 27% of households were led by parents missing critical digital skills, such as those needed to protect their family from online harms such as scams, bullying and grooming, raising concerns for children's online safety. A smaller proportion (18.5%) did not fully meet the equipment and services threshold, lacking one or more of broadband, TV or devices.

Eman's family of five shared one laptop until recently. It made it difficult for her 12-year-old daughter to complete her daily online homework, as her older daughter, 16, needed the machine to study for her GCSEs. The family in Yorkshire were recently given a second laptop by the Learn for Life hub, which is part of the Good Things Foundation's network.

"When we got this laptop, my younger daughter started to study more. Before she couldn't do it [as easily], because my older daughter was using it all the time - her GCSEs are very important," Eman said. The parent, who has lived in the UK for two years, said it had also helped her to develop her English skills.

She said her younger daughter had often relied on using a smartphone but struggled to work on the small screen. "Before, my younger daughter was waiting on her sister until it was late to do her homework, and now she can do it when she comes home. It makes it much easier for her and us also - it was a lot of pressure on the household."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nearly half of UK families excluded from modern digital society, study finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Exclusive: Lack of online skills and access creates digital divide that amplifies other exclusions, says report

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
TikTok star Danielle Walsh has alcohol video banned by watchdog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TikTok star Danielle Walsh has alcohol video banned by watchdog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Danielle Walsh is told future adverts should not encourage excessive alcohol consumption by watchdog.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Taiwanese entertainer replicates dead daughter with AI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Taiwanese entertainer replicates dead daughter with AI

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Apple fined €1.8bn by EU for breaking streaming rules

# data[].attributes.body
Finally big tech companies being held to account for following copyright rules

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Apple has been fined €1.8bn (£1.5bn) by the EU for breaking competition laws over music streaming.

The firm had prevented streaming services from informing users of payment options outside the Apple app store, the European Commission said.

Competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager said Apple abused its dominant position in the market for a decade.

She ordered the US tech giant to remove all the restrictions. Apple has said it will appeal against the decision.

The European Commission's decision was triggered by a complaint by Swedish music streaming service Spotify, which was unhappy about the restriction and Apple's 30% fee..

Ms Vestager said Apple had restricted "developers from informing consumers about alternative, cheaper music services available outside of the Apple ecosystem".

"This is illegal under EU antitrust rules," she said.

However, Apple said it would appeal, adding there was no evidence consumers had been harmed.

"The decision was reached despite the Commission's failure to uncover any credible evidence of consumer harm, and ignores the realities of a market that is thriving, competitive, and growing fast," the company said in a statement.

"The primary advocate for this decision, and the biggest beneficiary, is Spotify, a company based in Stockholm, Sweden.

"Spotify has the largest music streaming app in the world, and has met with the EC [European Commission] more than 65 times during this investigation," it said.

Spotify called the fine handed out to Apple "an important moment" and said it sent "a powerful message" that "no company, not even a monopoly like Apple, can wield power abusively to control how other companies interact with their customers".

Apple said the Swedish company pays no commission to them as it sells its subscriptions on its website and not on the app store.

Spotify had argued that the restrictions benefit Apple's rival music streaming service, Apple Music.

Digital Markets Act

In January, Apple announced plans to allow EU customers to download apps outside of their own app store, as the introduction of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) drew closer.

The aim of the European Union's DMA is to help competition in the technology sector and to try to break down the stronghold the likes of Apple and Google have on the market.

The tech companies were given six months from August last year to comply with a full list of requirements under the new legislation, or face a fine of up to 10% of their annual turnover.

The firms have until later this week to comply with a raft of changes announced since the start of the year, as Apple, Meta and TikTok pursue challenges to aspects of the law.

Law professor at EDHEC, Anne Witt, told the BBC the DMA will have a "significant impact" on the way designated platforms operate within the EU.

"It is a more effective but also much blunter legal tool in the fight against market concentration in the digital economy," she said.

Last week, Spotify and 33 other companies operating across a wide range of digital sectors wrote to the European Commission with a renewed attack on Apple's "lack of compliance" with the DMA.

"Apple's new terms not only disregard both the spirit and letter of the law, but if left unchanged, make a mockery of the DMA and the considerable efforts by the European Commission and EU institutions to make digital markets competitive," it said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Apple fined €1.8bn by EU for breaking streaming rules

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It comes after Spotify complained about a block on telling users about cheaper alternatives to app store.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Mary Poppins film age rating raised over 'discriminatory language'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Mary Poppins, the classic film starring Julie Andrews, has had its age rating raised by British film censors because it features "discriminatory language".

The 1964 film has been reclassified from a U, which stands for universal, to a PG, for parental guidance.

In it, a derogatory term originally used by white Europeans about nomadic peoples in southern Africa is used to refer to soot-faced chimney-sweeps.

That now "exceeds our guidelines" for U films, the BBFC said.

The film is set in London in 1910 and follows a magical nanny, played by Dame Julie, who looks after a family's children with the help of Bert, a busking chimney-sweep played by Dick Van Dyke.

It won five Oscars in 1965, including best actress and best song.

In the film, Admiral Boom, a neighbour and Naval veteran who thinks he is still in charge of a ship, uses the word twice.

The British Board of Film Classification said it classified the film in 1964 and then again for a re-release in 2013.

"Most recently, the film was resubmitted to us in February 2024 for another theatrical re-release, and we reclassified it PG for discriminatory language," a spokesperson said.

"Mary Poppins (1964) includes two uses of the discriminatory term 'hottentots'.

"While Mary Poppins has a historical context, the use of discriminatory language is not condemned, and ultimately exceeds our guidelines for acceptable language at U. We therefore classified the film PG for discriminatory language."

The Oxford English Dictionary says the term, which referred to the Khoikhoi and San people, is "generally considered both archaic and offensive".

The BBFC said its research about racism and discrimination showed that a key concern for people, particularly parents, was "the potential to expose children to discriminatory language or behaviour which they may find distressing or repeat without realising the potential offence".

The organisation says a PG rating "should not unsettle a child aged around eight or older" and that "unaccompanied children of any age may watch, but parents are advised to consider whether the content may upset younger, or more sensitive, children.

A U rating means a film should be "suitable for audiences aged four years and over" although the website adds "it is impossible to predict what might upset any particular child".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mary Poppins film age rating raised over 'discriminatory language'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The classic film is changed from a U to a PG rating because it features "discriminatory language".

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Home Secretary warns deepfakes could 'hijack' British elections

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
James Cleverly has warned that deepfakes may skew the upcoming election

He said deepfakes were already disrupting democratic elections

Cleverly is set to meet Silicon Valley bosses soon

Deepfakes generated by AI provide the 'perfect storm' for those looking to hijack the upcoming general election, the Home Secretary has warned.

James Cleverley said the era of these technologies misleading and disrupting important democratic decisions was 'already in play', The Times reported.

It comes as Mr Cleverly is reportedly due to meet with Silicon Valley bosses to urge greater action from large technology companies to protect democracy.

Earlier this month some of the companies signed a pact to voluntarily adopt 'reasonable precautions' to prevent AI tools from being used to disrupt democratic elections around the world.

However, this pact did not commit to banning or removing deepfakes.

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan fell victim to a fake AI recording of him supposedly making inflammatory remarks in the run up to Armistice Day protests last year.

The material shared on social media featured a simulation of Mr Khan's voice saying he did not care 'about the Remembrance weekend' and suggesting the commemorations be postponed to allow for a pro-Palestinian march to go ahead.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak confirmed a UK general election will take place at some point this year, although an exact date has not yet been set.

Mr Cleverly told The Times that 'increasingly today the battle of ideas and policies takes place in the ever-changing and expanding digital sphere'.

He said: 'The era of deepfake and AI-generated content to mislead and disrupt is already in play.

'The landscape it is inserted into needs its rules, transparency and safeguards for its users.

'The questions asked about digital content and the sources of digital content are no less relevant than those asked about the content and sources at dispatch boxes, newsrooms or billboard ads.'

Mr Cleverly said 'malign actors' and criminals would attempt to use generative AI to quickly produce thousands of illicit images or deepfakes, which could then be shared unpunished on encrypted services and with millions on social media within seconds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Home Secretary warns deepfakes could 'hijack' British elections

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
James Cleverley said the era of AI misleading and disrupting important democratic decisions was 'already in play'

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Why is Apple facing a €500m fine from EU over music streaming?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Apple is to be fined €500m (£427m) for allegedly hobbling rivals in the music streaming market.

The Financial Times reported that the EU's executive arm, the European Commission, will hand down the punishment after a long-running investigation.

Why does Apple face the prospect of a fine?

After a complaint by Spotify in 2019, the EU has been investigating Apple's position in the music streaming app market. It has whittled down its investigation to focus on certain restrictions imposed on app developers by Apple. These restrictions prevent developers such as Spotify from telling iPhone and iPad users about cheaper music subscriptions that are available outside the App Store. Spotify argues that this benefits the tech company's rival app, Apple Music.

The case is the latest example of legal wrangling over Apple's App Store - a key digital gateway and source of complaint from companies that use it.

Spotify is a longstanding critic of Apple's App Store rules, which include charging a 30% fee on apps and in-app purchases. Apple moved recently to meet some of those concerns, under pressure from the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA), by announcing that it will allow EU customers to download apps without going through its own store.

What does the EU think of Apple's behaviour?

The EU declined to comment. But it indicated it would punish Apple in February last year when it published a new statement of objections over the case, a formal step in which Brussels sets out its concerns about a company's behaviour. The commission said it viewed the restrictions as "unfair trading conditions" that breach article 102 of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union - or in simpler terms, abuse of a dominant position in a specific market.

The commission said it was concerned that the restrictions prevent developers from "informing consumers about where and how to subscribe to streaming services at lower prices".

What happens next?

The FT reported that the commission will announce the fine early next month. The maximum penalty a company can face for anti-competitive behaviour is capped at 10% of its global turnover. In the case of Apple, this points to a potential fine of $30bn (£24bn) although, according to the FT, the final figure will be substantially lower. Apple will also be able to appeal against any decision by the commission.

What do Apple and Spotify say?

Both declined to comment on Monday. Last year Apple said its store had helped Spotify become Europe's top music streaming service and it hoped the commission would "end its pursuit of a complaint that has no merit". According to the FT, that seems unlikely.

skip past newsletter promotion
Alex Hern's weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion

Spotify, for its part, has said its complaint against Apple is about creating a "level playing field". It has argued that the App Store restrictions hand an advantage to Apple's own streaming service, Apple Music.

What do experts say?

Anne Witt, a professor of antitrust law at EDHEC business school in France, says Apple already faces a tougher regulatory environment thanks to the introduction of the DMA - which covers big digital "gatekeepers" such as Apple. Indeed, Apple has opened up its App Store to competition because of that legislation. Witt says if Apple is punished after the Spotify complaint, it will show that the commission does not expect the DMA to overshadow EU competition procedures.

"The commission has stressed from the beginning that the DMA was not supposed to replace, but complement the competition rules," says Witt. "This decision is probably meant to confirm this commitment. Whether it will work out that way in the long run is another matter as the DMA is bound to be a much more effective (but also blunter) tool."

The Open Markets Institute, which researches the impact of corporate monopolies, says the size of the reported fine will not hurt Apple.

"It's far too small to give Apple any meaningful incentive to play by the rules - €500m is what it earns in revenue in roughly half a day," says Max von Thun, the OMI's Europe director.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why is Apple facing a €500m fine from EU over music streaming?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
European Commission will reportedly hand down punishment after tech organisation imposed 'unfair trading conditions' in the music streaming market

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg apologises to families in fiery US Senate hearing

# data[].attributes.headline
Zuckerberg apologises for impact of Meta

# data[].attributes.subject
Zuckerberg apologises for impact of Meta

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has apologised to families who say their children had been harmed by social media, during a fiery hearing in the US Senate.

Mr Zuckerberg - who runs Instagram and Facebook - turned to them and said "no-one should go through" what they had.

He and the bosses of TikTok, Snap, X and Discord were questioned for almost four hours by senators from both parties.

Lawmakers wanted to know what they are doing to protect children online.

Legislation is currently going through Congress which aims to hold social media companies to account for material posted on their platforms.

Wednesday's hearing was a rare opportunity for the US senators to question tech bosses.

Mr Zuckerberg and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew voluntarily agreed to testify - but the heads of Snap, X (formerly Twitter) and messaging platform Discord initially refused and were sent government-issued subpoenas.

Behind the five tech bosses sat families who said their children had self-harmed or killed themselves as a result of social media content.

They made their feelings known throughout, hissing when the CEOs entered and applauding when lawmakers asked tough questions.

While the hearing mostly focused on the protection of children from online sexual exploitation, the questions varied widely as the senators took advantage of having five powerful executives there under oath.

TikTok - which is owned by Chinese company ByteDance - CEO Mr Chew was asked whether his company shared US users' data with the Chinese government, which he denied.

US Senator Tom Cotton asked Mr Chew, who is from Singapore, if he had ever belonged to the Chinese Communist Party.

"Senator, I'm Singaporean. No," Mr Chew replied.

Mr Cotton then asked, "Have you ever been associated or affiliated with Chinese Communist Party?"

Mr Chew responded: "No, senator. Again, I'm Singaporean."

He added that as a father of three young children he knew the issues under discussion were "horrific and the nightmare of every parent".

He admitted his own children did not use TikTok because of the rules in Singapore which bar under-13s from creating accounts.

But it was Mr Zuckerberg, chief executive of Meta, who came under the most scrutiny, as he testified before Congress for an eighth time.

At one point, Republican Senator Ted Cruz asked, "Mr Zuckerberg, what the hell were you thinking?" when he showed the tech boss an Instagram prompt that warns users they may be about to see child sexual abuse material, but asks if they would like to "see the results anyway".

Mr Zuckerberg said the "basic science behind that" is "it's often helpful to, rather than just blocking it, to help direct them towards something that could be helpful". He also promised to "personally look into it".

During another exchange with Republican Senator Josh Hawley, Mr Zuckerberg was invited to apologise to the families sitting behind him.

He stood up, turned to the audience and said: "I'm sorry for everything you've all gone through, it's terrible.

"No-one should have to go through the things that your families have suffered."

At the heart of the hearing was the companies' attitudes to the online safety legislation currently going through Congress.

This was summed up in a tense exchange between Jason Citron of Discord and Republican lawmaker Lindsey Graham.

Mr Graham listed a number of bills going through Congress related to online safety, asking if Mr Citron supported them or not.

While Mr Graham gave Mr Citron little opportunity to respond, the Discord boss appeared to have reservations about most of them.

Mr Graham concluded: "So here you are - if you're waiting on these guys to solve the problem, we're gonna die waiting."

Ahead of the hearing, Meta had announced new safety measures, including that minors will now, by default, be unable to receive messages on Instagram and Messenger from strangers.

Social media industry analyst Matt Navarra told the BBC he thought the hearing resembled many similar showdowns, with "lots of US political grandstanding" and a perfect photo opportunity provided by Mr Zuckerberg's apology.

He added that despite senators agreeing on the need for bipartisan legislation to regulate platforms, the question of what happens next remained unclear.

"We've seen these hearings time and time again and they have often, so far, led still to not actually generate any significant or substantial regulation," he said.

"We're in 2024 and US has virtually no regulation, as was pointed out during the hearings, with regards to the social media companies."

The bosses also revealed how many people they employed to moderate content on their platforms.

Meta and TikTok, with the largest user numbers of the platforms represented, said they had 40,000 moderators each, while Snap said it had 2,300, X had 2,000 and Discord - who said it was smaller - had "hundreds" of moderators.

Discord is a messaging platform and has previously been questioned over how it detects and prevents child abuse across its platform.

After the hearing, some of the parents who were in the room staged a rally outside, with several calling on lawmakers to urgently pass legislation to hold firms accountable.

"Just like I did, many parents continue to think that these harms that we're talking about today won't affect their families," said Joann Bogard, whose son Mason died in May 2019. She said he had taken part in a TikTok choking trend.

"These harms are happening overnight to our average kids," she said. "We have the testimonies. Now is the time for our legislators to pass the Kids Online Safety Act".

Arturo Béjar, a former senior staff member who testified to Congress in November 2023, was also there, and told the BBC: "Meta is trying to push their responsibility to provide a safe environment for teens to parents, yet won't add a button where a teen can tell them they've experienced an unwanted advance."

"How can they make it safe for teens without that?"

During today's hearing, Meta said it had brought in "over 30 tools" to support a safe environment for teens online.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg apologises to families in fiery US Senate hearing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bosses from five of the largest social media firms were grilled about how they are protecting children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Zoe Kleinman & Imran Rahman-Jones

Technology editor & technology reporter

Popular video game Fortnite will come back to iPhones after a four-year absence.

Developer Epic Games will be allowed to run its own app store on Apple devices after a new EU law designed to increase competition.

Currently, anyone with an iPhone can only download apps from Apple's own App Store.

But Apple must allow its customers to access alternative app stores on iOS devices purchased in the EU from March.

Apple has always maintained that its rules protect users' security.

In a post on X, formerly Twitter, Fortnite wrote: "Remember Fortnite on iOS? How bout we bring that back."

It added: "Apple, the world is watching."

Epic Games famously withdrew hit game Fortnite from the App Store after disagreeing with Apple's policies. It has not been available on the App Store since 2020, although it is possible to play it via the web.

Apple had been accused of creating a monopoly, giving customers and developers no choice but to go through its own channels, and charging developers up to 30% commission.

It has meant that developers who either fail to meet Apple's standards for being on the App Store, or do not wish to pay its fees, are excluded from the millions of people who use Apple gadgets.

In Fortnite's X post, it also wrote: "Shoutout DMA - an important new law in the EU making this possible."

That refers to the EU's Digital Markets Act coming into effect. The aim of the new law is to regulate the largest companies that are gatekeepers to services such as search engines and app stores to make the market fairer for established companies and smaller firms.

The changes will not apply in the UK at this stage - although the UK's Digital Markets Bill, which is currently going through Parliament, is likely to put Apple's practices under similar regulatory scrutiny.

Epic Games chief executive Tim Sweeney said on X there was a lot of "hot garbage in Apple's announcement".

These include, he said, "junk fees on downloads".

He may be referring to the core technology fee, which charges developers of apps that are downloaded by over a million people.

Developers will have to pay €0.50 for every user who downloads their app, after the first million downloads.

This is a charge to the makers of apps, not to the customers.

Browser choice

Apple also said it would further open up browser choice, so that EU users will be able to opt out of using the firm's Safari web browser from the very first time they open it.

But it warned that while it was setting high standards for all new alternative apps and stores, it believed the move would create additional security risks for customers, and increase their risk of being exposed to malware, fraud and scams hidden within apps from other places.

"The changes we're announcing today comply with the Digital Markets Act's requirements in the European Union, while helping to protect EU users from the unavoidable increased privacy and security threats this regulation brings," Apple said.

The US tech giant sells premium-priced products, with the promise that they offer an extra layer of security.

It said: "For apps that use alternative payment processing, Apple will not be able to issue refunds, and will have less ability to support customers encountering issues, scams, or fraud."

Android apps can already come from a wider variety of stores. However, as a result, malware is far more common on Android devices than Apple ones.

The purpose of both the new EU rules and UK proposals are to try to maintain open and competitive markets where lots of companies can successfully operate alongside each other.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
iPhone users in the EU will soon be able to download apps from places other than the App Store.

# data[].attributes.body
Impact of AI on fake realities. Baudrillard

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
BBC review: Ofcom to gain more powers over BBC News website

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ofcom is to gain more powers over BBC online services, including the BBC News website, as part of a series of changes unveiled by the government.

Under the plans, the media regulator will be able to take enforcement action if articles don't meet relevant broadcast standards.

The move is intended to give audiences greater confidence that the BBC is being held to account, ministers said.

The BBC said it remained "the number one source for trusted news".

Ofcom said it welcomed the government's recommendations, "which will support us as we continue to hold the BBC to account on behalf of audiences".

The BBC is investing more money into digital journalism, as audiences increasingly switch from television to online news.

Currently, Ofcom oversees the BBC's TV, radio and on-demand output, but it has no formal enforcement powers for BBC online material.

It can only issue an opinion on whether the BBC has observed editorial guidelines in its online content.

But the government is now extending Ofcom's regulation to parts of the BBC's digital services. This includes to areas over which the broadcaster has editorial control, including the BBC News website and the BBC's YouTube channel.

The move is part of a package of changes which are being recommended by ministers following a review of the BBC, at the halfway point of its current charter.

The review looked at areas such as editorial standards and impartiality, the way the BBC handles complaints about coverage, and the effectiveness of its governance arrangements.

The government consulted with the BBC and Ofcom in developing the recommendations.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport said impartiality remains "an ongoing issue for audiences" and cited "a lack of public confidence" in the way the BBC currently handles complaints.

It said it would review the effectiveness of the BBC's new social media guidelines, which were brought in following a row over Gary Lineker's social media posts.

Other recommendations include greater independent scrutiny of complaints handling, and improving transparency for commercial media organisations.

And Ofcom will be given a new legally binding responsibility to review more of the BBC's complaints decisions.

The BBC is also being urged to better reflect diverse views in decision-making and improve engagement with underserved audience groups.

Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer said the government wanted to see "a strong, independent BBC" that would thrive in years to come.

But she warned that in a rapidly changing media landscape, the BBC needed to adapt or risk losing the trust of audiences.

"We have recommended reforms that I believe will improve accountability while boosting public confidence in the BBC's ability to be impartial and respond to concerns raised by licence fee payers," she said.

"These changes will better set up the BBC to ask difficult questions of itself, and make sure Ofcom can continue to hold the broadcaster to account."

A BBC spokesperson said the review was designed to look at the corporation's governance and regulation, adding: "We're pleased the government's findings reflect that overall these are working well."

On the topic of impartiality, the spokesperson said "no other organisation takes its commitment to impartiality more seriously", and that the corporation has well-established plans to continue to improve standards.

"We know this matters to audiences and the BBC continues to be the number one source for trusted news, with the highest scores for impartiality and accuracy," they said.

The spokesperson said the BBC was "operationally and editorially independent", adding: "We remain committed to continuous improvement to ensure we deliver for all licence fee payers."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC review: Ofcom to gain more powers over BBC News website

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is part of a series of changes unveiled by the government following a review of the BBC.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
All GTA 6 Real Life Florida Man References

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
All GTA 6 Real Life Florida Man References

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Sally Wainwright is "rewriting history" in new show Renegade Nell - Radio Times

# data[].attributes.body
Fredrich Jameson rewriting history

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sally Wainwright is "rewriting history" in new show Renegade Nell - Radio Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Sally, I think, is rewriting history a little bit, and that's something lovely about the show."

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Trump and his toadies are trying to rewrite history so that he’s not an insurrectionist — The Guardian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump and his toadies are trying to rewrite history so that he’s not an insurrectionist — The Guardian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Trump didn’t do those bad things, according to GOP legislators, bankers, and Trump himself. And if he did, they didn’t count

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Marty Baron on truth, democracy, and the press in an age of distrust - Vox

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marty Baron on truth, democracy, and the press in an age of distrust - Vox

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The former executive editor of the Washington Post on what worries him about America's future - and why defeatism is not an option.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Concerns over how much a deterrent cyberflashing ruling will be — The Times and The Sunday Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Concerns over how much a deterrent cyberflashing ruling will be — The Times and The Sunday Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Judge Samantha Leigh made legal history this week as she handed Nicholas Hawkes a 66-week prison sentence — the first for the new offence of cyberflashing. But concern lingers over whether the landmark ruling will set a lasting trend or was an anomaly involving specific circumstances. Regardless, the sentencing at Southend crown court in what was the first prosecution for the offence in the Online Safety Act was broadly welcomed by campaigners and lawyers alike. Mark Jones, a partner at the firm

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
OpenAI wants to use video generation model Sora to break into Hollywood — Tubefilter

# data[].attributes.body
Interesting discussion on the future of AI generated footage used in film production.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
OpenAI wants to use video generation model Sora to break into Hollywood — Tubefilter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
OpenAI wants to become a player in the movie industry. The developer of ChatGPT has initiated conversations with film studios and hopes to integrate its generative model Sora into Hollywood productions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Anger from campaigners as WhatsApp lowers age limit to 13 in UK and EU

# data[].attributes.body
Changing regulations and the public reaction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Campaigners have reacted with anger to the social media company Meta lowering the minimum age for WhatsApp users from 16 to 13 in the UK and EU.

The change was announced in February and came into force on Wednesday. The campaign group Smartphone Free Childhood said the move "flies in the face of the growing national demand for big tech to do more to protect our children".

It said: "Officially allowing anyone over the age of 12 to use their platform (the minimum age was 16 before today) sends a message that it's safe for children. But teachers, parents and experts tell a very different story. As a community we're fed up with the tech giants putting their shareholder profits before protecting our children."

WhatsApp said the change brought the age limit in line with that in the majority of countries, and that protections were in place.

Ofcom's director of online safety strategy, Mark Bunting, said the regulator would not hesitate to fine social media companies that failed to follow its directions, once it had the power to do so.

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Ofcom was writing codes of practice for enforcing online safety. "So when our powers come into force next year, we'll be able to hold them to account for the effectiveness of what they're doing," he said.

"If they're not taking those steps at that point, and they can't demonstrate to us that they're taking alternative steps which are effective at keeping children safe, then we will be able to investigate. We have powers to direct them to make changes, if we believe changes are necessary to make.

"If they don't comply with those directions, we do have powers to levy fines - and we won't hesitate to use those powers - if there's no other way of driving the change that we think is needed."

This week Meta, which also owns Facebook and Instagram, unveiled a range of safety features designed to protect users, in particular young people, from "sextortion" and intimate image abuse.

It confirmed it would begin testing a filter called Nudity Protection in direct messages on Instagram, which will be switched on by default for users under the age of 18 and will automatically blur images sent to users that are detected as containing nudity.

When receiving nude images, users will also see a message urging them not to feel pressure to respond, and an option to block the sender and report the chat.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anger from campaigners as WhatsApp lowers age limit to 13 in UK and EU

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Child safety group says Meta 'putting profits before protecting children', as messaging app lowers age limit from 16

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Nine-year-olds added to malicious WhatsApp groups

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A government source said the decision to lower the minimum age for WhatsApp access "flies in the face of growing concerns from parents about children's social media use and rising adolescent mental ill-health".

"Policymakers will rightly ask what evidence Meta has to prove it's safe for 14 year olds to access encrypted WhatsApp groups and what protections they're putting in place to empower parents to keep their kids safe."

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told the BBC that, as a father of two children, he believed it was "imperative that we keep them safe online".

He said the Online Safety Act was "one of the first anywhere in the world" and would be a step towards that goal.

"What it does is give the regulator really tough new powers to make sure that the big social media companies are protecting our children from this type of material," he said.

"They shouldn't be seeing it - particularly things like self-harm - and if they don't comply with the guidelines that the regulator puts down, there will be in for very significant fines.

"We want our kids to be growing up safely - out playing in fields, or online."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nine-year-olds added to malicious WhatsApp groups

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Schools warn thousands of parents on Tyneside about malicious group chats on the messaging app.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Google blocking links to California news outlets from search results

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Google blocking links to California news outlets from search results

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tech giant is protesting proposed law that would require large online platforms to pay ‘journalism usage fee’

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Ofcom: Almost a quarter of kids aged 5-7 have smartphones

# data[].attributes.body
Refer to David Buckingham and the digital divide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nearly a quarter of UK five-to-seven-year-olds now have their own smartphone, Ofcom research suggests.

Social media use also rose in the age group over last year with nearly two in five using messaging service WhatsApp, despite its minimum age of 13.

The communications regulator warned parental enforcement of rules "appeared to be diminishing."

It also said the figures should be a "wake up call" for the industry to do more to protect children.

In its annual study of children's relationship with the media and online worlds, Ofcom said the percentage of children aged between five and seven who used messaging services had risen from 59% to 65%.

The number on social media went up from 30% to 38%, while for livestreams it increased from 39% to 50%. Just over 40% are reported to be gaming online - up from 34% the year before.

Over half of children under 13 used social media, contrary to most of the big platforms' rules, and many admitted to lying to gain access to new apps and services.

"I think this is a wake up call for industry. They have to take account of the users they have, not the users that their terms and conditions say they have," Mark Bunting, from Ofcom's Online Safety Group told BBC News.

"We've known for a long time that children, under the age limit on a lot of the most popular apps, are widely using those apps, and companies are now under a legal obligation to take steps to keep those children safe," he added.

Some campaigners want age limits to be introduced for smartphone use, and existing ones raised for social media.

However it is already the case that most phones possessed by children are likely to have been provided by parents - under-18's cannot sign contracts, and most big operators say they do not sell pay-as-you-go phones to under-16's.

Many parents give children phones because they want to be able to contact them or to track them via their mobile.

Parents who spoke to the BBC also cited peer pressure, saying it was a struggle to keep children off social media when all their friends were a using an app. One parent said she felt "pushed into a corner".

Closely watched

Heather Bryson who is 11 won wide recognition for her online exercise videos designed to help people in care homes during the pandemic, particularly those suffering dementia.

She's had a smartphone since she was eight-years-old.

Her parents feel she's benefited socially from being online, but what she does and who she communicates with are closely supervised.

"I think it's become an important tool for anyone growing up these days", her father, Gary Bryson says.

"Being able to monitor exactly what she's doing is paramount".

Heather says it lets her talk with friends on social media and through message apps, but there are negatives.

"Sometimes I get boys swearing at me online in chats which is not nice, but the good things there are loads of nice people out there too".

"It's just something that you get used to after a while but you shouldn't have to", she says.

'Resigned' parents

Only a third of parents know the correct minimum age requirement for most social media platforms Ofcom suggests

But the regulator said parents were also less willing to enforce the rules they knew about.

Three in ten parents were willing to let a child aged 5-7 have a social media profile even if it was under the minimum age permitted for the apps, an increase compared to last year.

Parents may be "resigned" to not being able to control children's online lives the new report notes.

Mr Bunting said he had "a lot of sympathy" for parents on this issue:

"It may not be about preventing use entirely for children under 13, which I think is very difficult in today's society. But parents can talk to their children about using those services safely. And we'd encourage them to do that," he said.

Phone free

Some say investigations like that carried out by the BBC this month - which found that children as young as nine were added to a malicious WhatsApp group - mean further action is needed.

Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta which owns WhatsApp and Instagram, has previously suggested that he favours requiring app-stores to check the ages of users.

Responding to the Ofcom report, Clare Fernyhough, of the Smartphone Free Childhood campaign, told the BBC that society had sleep-walked into "just assuming that we all need a smartphone - and now we're beginning to see the huge impact that that's having"

But Professor Sonia Livingstone, Director of the Digital Futures for Children centre, said it was wrong to protect children by restricting their access to technology.

"This is the first generation with access to a powerful personal computer, it could be so amazing for them, and that's what children want too," she told the BBC.

"But the companies are risky by design, and what we need is child rights by design", she said.

Ofcom said new age limits for smartphones would be a matter for government.

In May it will be consulting on the steps it expects tech firms to take to ensure children have safer experiences online, and later on new uses of AI to combat harmful content online.

Does your young child have a smartphone? Share your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.

Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:

If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ofcom: Almost a quarter of kids aged 5-7 have smartphones

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The regulator calls the data a "wake up call", and says parents and industry need to do more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Why I won’t stand for Declan Rice’s girlfriend Lauren Fryer being trolled — HELLO!

# data[].attributes.body
Impact on celebrity and the role that social media has in regulating trolls.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why I won’t stand for Declan Rice’s girlfriend Lauren Fryer being trolled — HELLO!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Wed, 24 Apr 2024 In the past few weeks, Lauren Fryer, partner of England and Arsenal footballer Declan Rice, has been the topic on everyone’s lips after the couple’s candid holiday photographs were published online. The 25-year-old was snapped enjoying herself on board a yacht with her partner of eight years, and negative comments have racked up in their thousands about how the mother-of-one looks. What’s more, Lauren has removed ALL photographs on her Instagram account, which is now totally

# data[].attributes.body
Online safety bill - protecting young people from the algorithm which currently has no regulation to speak of

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Netflix series receives backlash after scene of man with erect penis leaves viewers outraged

# data[].attributes.body
Netflix shocking viewers/attracting viewers simultaneously with a lack of regulation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The racy scene has left Netflix viewers and commentators appalled

People have been Netflix and chilling for years, but one series may be taking the sauciness to another level.
Netflix has come under a fire for a scene in their latest miniseries (Netflix)
In fact, the show's depiction of a fully erect penis has sparked a backlash among viewers.

The mini-series, ironically called A Man In Full, does feature a warning for 'sex, language, sex reference, sexual images, injury detail'.

However, it does not include a warning for the scene in sixth and final episode.

In the episode, actor Tom Pelphrey's character of Raymond Peepgrass has just taken some Viagra and then drops his bedsheet in front of Charlie Croker ( Jeff Daniels) to reveal...well, the result of Viagra.

Although the series as a whole has been praised on social media, this scene in question has divided opinion.

Mary Killen, columnist at the Spectator, wrote: "I don't want to see graphic sexual images when I'm watching a drama. There is too much already and it is reducing us to no better than barnyard animals.

"Viewers shouldn't be forced to see pornography. This trend will end in tears as it's depressing, unmysterious and taking away some of life's magic."

Jen Chaney from Vulture wrote: "Right now you are probably feeling shocked, flabbergasted, disgusted, profoundly confused, or some combination of all of these emotions. That is okay."
This scene has caused some controversy among Netflix viewers (Netflix)
Politician Alexander Stafford added: "If Netflix is serving up this sort of low-grade, pornographic rubbish, we need to give Ofcom full oversight of the streaming giant's output as soon as possible."

There are no strict rules from Ofcom about whether or not a penis can be shown.

But the broadcast regulator does have some guidance on the matter.

Ofcom states 'material unsuitable for children should not, in general, be shown before 2100 or after 0530'.

It adds: "Broadcasters must ensure that material broadcast after the watershed, or made available on BBC ODPS, which contains images and/or language of a strong or explicit sexual nature, but is not 'adult sex material' as defined in Rule 1.18 above, is justified by the context."

Given that Netflix is a streaming service, it doesn't fall under the remit of Ofcom regulations.

MP Sara Britcliffe noted: "Streaming services are available at any time of day, so watershed protection doesn't apply."

Over on Reddit, a user noted the different attitudes towards male and female nudity.
Featured Image Credit: Netflix
They wrote: "That explicit male nudity scene in A Man in Full was not a first. Why explicit male nudity is OK to show in TV-MA series but female not?"

Tyla has approached Netflix for comment.

Topics: TV And Film, Netflix

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Netflix series receives backlash after scene of man with erect penis leaves viewers outraged

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Netflix miniseries had some calling for Ofcom to intervene

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Social media subscriptions *can* work - but are the numbers big enough? 
A few thoughts about subs v ads… and a confession 
https://t.co/W41kPvduEx

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
As Twitter and Facebook both now offer paid subscription, what impact is it having?

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
Social media subscriptions *can* work - but are the numbers big enough? 
A few thoughts about subs v ads… and a confession 
https://t.co/W41kPvduEx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Social media subscriptions *can* work - but are the numbers big enough?
A few thoughts about subs v ads… and a confession https://t.co/W41kPvduEx
— Zoe Kleinman (@zsk) May 12, 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].description
As Twitter and Facebook both now offer paid subscription, what impact is it having?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
Social media subscriptions *can* work - but are the numbers big enough? 
A few thoughts about subs v ads… and a confession 
https://t.co/W41kPvduEx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
Social media subscriptions *can* work - but are the numbers big enough? 
A few thoughts about subs v ads… and a confession 
https://t.co/W41kPvduEx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Social media subscriptions *can* work - but are the numbers big enough? 
A few thoughts about subs v ads… and a confession 
https://t.co/W41kPvduEx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
As Twitter and Facebook both now offer paid subscription, what impact is it having?

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Ros Atkins on... How different countries protect children online

# data[].attributes.body
Very simple summary of different national approaches to online regulation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This week, the UK's media regulator, Ofcom, set out new rules for social media companies - aimed at protecting children from harmful content online.

More than 40 measures have been set out - including making firms change their algorithms and perform more rigorous age checks.

Around the world, governments are considering - or have already passed - similar legislation. Analysis editor Ros Atkins looks at what other countries are doing to try and protect children online.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ros Atkins on... How different countries protect children online

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BBC Analysis editor Ros Atkins looks at what what is being done to prevent minors seeing harmful content.

# data[].attributes.body
A summary of the new OFCOM rules for the online safety act

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Digital recreations of dead people need urgent regulation, AI ethicists say

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Digital recreations of dead people are on the cusp of reality and urgently need regulation, AI ethicists have argued, warning "deadbots" could cause psychological harm to, and even "haunt", their creators and users.

Such services, which are already technically possible to create and legally permissible, could let users upload their conversations with dead relatives to "bring grandma back to life" in the form of a chatbot, researchers from the University of Cambridge suggest.

They may be marketed at parents with terminal diseases who want to leave something behind for their child to interact with, or simply sold to still-healthy people who want to catalogue their entire life and create an interactive legacy.

But in each case, unscrupulous companies and thoughtless business practices could cause lasting psychological harm and fundamentally disrespect the rights of the deceased, the paper argues.

"Rapid advancements in generative AI mean that nearly anyone with internet access and some basic knowhow can revive a deceased loved one," said Dr Katarzyna Nowaczyk-Basińska, one of the study's co-authors at Cambridge's Leverhulme centre for the future of intelligence (LCFI).

"This area of AI is an ethical minefield. It's important to prioritise the dignity of the deceased, and ensure that this isn't encroached on by financial motives of digital afterlife services, for example."

One risk is companies who monetise their digital legacy services through advertising. Users of such a service may receive a shock when their digitally recreated loved one begins suggesting that they order takeaways rather than cooking from scratch, the paper suggests, leading to the uncomfortable realisation that they weren't consulted on whether their data could be used in such a way.

Much worse outcomes are possible when the users of such services are children. Parents who want to help their children deal with the loss of a mother or father may soon turn to deadbots.

But there is little evidence that such an approach is psychologically helpful, and much to suggest it could cause significant damage by short-circuiting the normal mourning process.

"No re-creation service can prove that allowing children to interact with 'deadbots' is beneficial or, at the very least, does not harm this vulnerable group," the paper warns.

To preserve the dignity of the dead, as well as the psychological wellbeing of the living, the researchers suggest a suite of best-practices which may even require regulation to enforce.

Such services should have procedures for sensitively "retiring" deadbots, for instance, and should limit their interactive features to adults only, as well as be very transparent about how they operate and the limitations of any artificial system.

skip past newsletter promotion
Alex Hern's weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion

The idea of using a ChatGPT-style AI system to recreate a dead loved one is not science fiction. In 2021, Joshua Barbeau made headlines after using GPT-3 to create a chatbot who spoke with the voice of his dead girlfriend, and six years before that, the developer Eugenia Kuyda converted the text messages of a close friend of hers into a chatbot, which ultimately led to the creation of popular AI companion app Replika.

The technology extends beyond chatbots, too. In 2021, the genealogy site MyHeritage introduced Deep Nostalgia, a feature that created animated videos of users' ancestors from still photos. After the feature went viral, the company admitted that some users "find it creepy".

"The results can be controversial and it's hard to stay indifferent to this technology," MyHeritage said at the time. "This feature is intended for nostalgic use, that is, to bring beloved ancestors back to life. Our driver videos don't include speech in order to prevent abuse of this, such as the creation of 'deep fake' videos of living people."

A year later, MyHeritage introduced DeepStory - which allowed users to generate talking videos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Digital recreations of dead people need urgent regulation, AI ethicists say

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fears 'deadbots' could cause psychological harm to their creators and users or digitally 'haunt' them

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
ChatGPT suspends Scarlett Johansson-like voice as actor speaks out against OpenAI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Scarlett Johansson has spoken out against OpenAI after the company used a voice eerily resembling her own in its new ChatGPT product.

The actor said in a statement she was approached by OpenAI nine months ago to voice its AI system but declined for "personal reasons". Johansson was "shocked" and "angered" when she heard the voice option, which "sounded so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference," she said.

OpenAI removed the heavily promoted voice option from ChatGPT on Monday following a widespread reaction to the flirtatious, feminine voice. The company had used the voice, which it calls "Sky", during its widely publicized event last week debuting the capabilities of the new ChatGPT-4o artificial intelligence model. Researchers talked with the AI assistant to show off Sky's personable and responsive affectations, which users and members of the media immediately compared to Johansson's AI companion character in the 2013 Spike Jonze film Her.

Even OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman, seemed to suggest that the vocal design was intentionally mimicking Johansson's character, posting a one-word tweet after the presentation that simply said "her". Less than a week later, OpenAI felt compelled to explicitly clarify that Sky was not based on Johansson. The company published a blogpost about Sky's creation and claimed that the company values the voice acting industry.

"Sky's voice is not an imitation of Scarlett Johansson but belongs to a different professional actress using her own natural speaking voice," the blogpost read. "To protect their privacy, we cannot share the names of our voice talents."

Johansson said when Altman initially approached her with the project, he told her that "he felt that by my voicing the system, I could bridge the gap between tech companies and creatives and help consumers to feel comfortable with the seismic shift concerning humans and AI. He said he felt that my voice would be comforting to people."

She claimed Altman reached out to her agent again "asking me to reconsider", two days before Sky was released. She said her lawyers then contacted OpenAI to have the voice removed.

While many commentators remarked on Sky's similarities to Johansson in Her - including Johansson's husband and Saturday Night Live cast member, Colin Jost, during a segment on the show's season finale - others questioned why the voice was so fawning and gendered. "You can really tell that a man built this tech," the Daily Show host Desi Lydic joked last week. "She's like, 'I have all the information in the world, but I don't know anything.'"

OpenAI claimed that it selected ChatGPT's vocals based on a range of criteria that included having a "timeless" quality and being "an approachable voice that inspires trust". OpenAI reviewed hundreds of voice acting submissions over a period of five months last year, the company said, releasing five different voice options for its ChatGPT in September. The chosen actors then flew to San Francisco for recording sessions that allowed OpenAI to train its models on their voices.

The company pulled back its Sky voice days after several top members of its safety team resigned, with a key researcher, Jan Leike, saying after he quit that the company was prioritizing "shiny products" over safety culture and processes. Altman and his fellow co-founder Greg Brockman defended the company over the weekend, stating that it would not release a product if there were safety concerns.

OpenAI's blogpost on Sunday about its creation of ChatGPT voices also made numerous mentions of the company collaborating with entertainment industry professionals and compensating voice actors for their work. AI companies, especially OpenAI, have been the focus of intense pushback, including lawsuits, from entertainers, creators and media companies over allegations of copyright violations and concern that AI will replace human workers. Major entertainment unions, such as Sag-Aftra, have gone on strike over issues that include how their likenesses will be used by artificial intelligence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ChatGPT suspends Scarlett Johansson-like voice as actor speaks out against OpenAI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
OpenAI says 'Sky' is not an imitation of actor's voice after users compare it to AI companion character in film Her

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The Internet’s Final Frontier: Remote Amazon Tribes

# data[].attributes.headline
Is Morozov right? Elon Musk corrupts with internet.

# data[].attributes.subject
Is Morozov right? Elon Musk corrupts with internet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Internet’s Final Frontier: Remote Amazon Tribes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Elon Musk’s Starlink has connected an isolated tribe to the outside world — and divided it from within.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Remote Brazilian tribe struggle with the trappings of the internet

# data[].attributes.headline
Brazilian Tribe struggle with the trappings of the internet

# data[].attributes.subject
Brazilian Tribe struggle with the trappings of the internet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The 2000-strong community quickly discovered the benefits of the internet

But the tribe is now forced to grapple with the perils brought on by the new tech

Leaders of a remote tribe in the Amazon rainforest have told how the arrival of the internet has left its members grappling with the trappings of social media addiction and pornography while falling for online scams.

The Marubo people, who for hundreds of years existed in small huts scattered along the Itui River in Brazil, were last year introduced to high-speed internet for the first time thanks to Elon Musk's Starlink satellite programme.

The 2,000-strong community quickly discovered the incredible benefits the newfound technology had to offer.

Tribespeople were suddenly able to call for help in the event of an emergency, with medical helicopters able to reach the injured in a matter of hours rather than days. They could also connect instantly with relatives or friends camped dozens of miles further down the river, or even further afield.

But shortly after the Marubo people were introduced to the pleasures of the internet, the perils quickly began to reveal themselves.

Now the indigenous tribal leaders report that people are becoming lazy, spending hours scrolling social media with teens hooked on graphic porn.

Enoque Marubo, 40, told reporters from the New York Times the internet had transformed the once simple and technologically resistant way of life his people had observed for centuries.

'It changed the routine so much that it was detrimental,' Enoque admitted. 'In the village, if you don't hunt, fish and plant, you don't eat,' he said.

Meanwhile, Alfredo Marubo - all members of the tribe share the same last name - said the sudden exposure to pornography had precipitated a worrying rise in overt sexual behaviour in a culture where kissing in public is seen as shocking.

He said young men were sharing explicit videos in group chats, adding that some prominent figures in the tribe had reported seeing more aggressive sexual behaviour from young men.

Alfredo also warned that, despite being more connected than ever before, members of the tribe had retreated from in-person social contact and had stopped speaking to their own families.

TamaSay Marubo, the first female to be granted a leadership role in the tribe, said that while social media had opened the eyes of young tribespeople to the world, it had also caused them to abandon their responsibilities in favour of spending hours on their smartphones.

Several members of the tribe said they were concerned the group's traditions would be lost, and also expressed worry that the social fabric of the tribe was being infected by rumours circulating on group chats.

Others explained that some internet users had been subjected to abuse from strangers on social media and had fallen for unspecified scams.

Tribe elder Tsainama Marubo, 73, put it simply.

'Things have gotten worse,' she said.

'Young people have gotten lazy because of the internet. They're learning the ways of the white people.'

Starlink, an initiative launched by Musk under his company SpaceX, owns around 60% of the roughly 7,500 satellites orbiting Earth and is the dominant player in the internet satellite arena.

Its technology was first made available in Brazil in 2022, but only reached the more remote areas of the Amazon, such as the banks of the Itui where the Marubo people live, in April last year.

Enoque Marubo, who had ventured into cities and spent time away from the tribe, told the New York Times he believed that achieving access to the internet could help his people share their experiences and communicate more effectively with the outside world.

He was one of the main tribal members responsible for getting in touch with outsiders and arranging the delivery of the Starlink system.

Enoque contacted Flora Dutra, a Brazilian activist who works with the Navi Global charity that aims to help indigenous communities in the Amazon access jobs, healthcare and other benefits, and involving them in projects that will impact the rainforest and their environment.

The pair managed to contact American philanthropist Allyson Reneau, who reportedly donated 20 Starlink units and worked with Navi Global to oversee their delivery to the Marubo.

Social media and porn addiction, online scams, misinformation and a decline in real-life social skills are all byproducts of constant internet usage that have long plagued the developed world.

But unlike those living in major urban centres - who became acquainted with the internet and smartphones as the technology steadily developed over time - the lives of the Marubo people changed immediately as they were confronted with the full capability of modern technology overnight.

As such, leaders have turned to desperate measures in a desperate attempt to limit the impact of the revolutionary new kit.

Access to Starlink is policed and time-restricted. Users can now browse the internet for a total of seven hours a day - two hours in the morning and five hours in the afternoon - though leaders do allow the community to have unrestricted access on Sundays.

This policy is seen as a temporary measure while the community adapts and figures out how to better integrate technology into daily life.

But just like the rest of the world, the Marubo people have no intention of going back to a life without internet - even with all its negative impacts in stark view.

'I think the internet will bring us much more benefit than harm,' Enoque said.

'The leaders have been clear. We can't live without the internet.'

And in spite of her complaints, even elder Tsainama Marubo said: 'Please don't take our internet away.'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Remote Brazilian tribe struggle with the trappings of the internet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Marubo people, who for hundreds of years existed in small huts scattered along the Itui River in Brazil, were last year introduced to high speed internet for the first time thanks to Starlink

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Facebook at 20: Four ways it changed the world - BBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Look at the image above. This is how Facebook, or The Facebook as it was then known, looked when Mark Zuckerberg and a handful of friends launched it from their student digs 20 years ago.

Since then, the world's most popular social network has been redesigned dozens of times.

But its aim has remained the same: to connect people online. And make mountains of money from advertising.

As the platform turns 20, here are four ways Facebook has changed the world.

Other social networks, such as MySpace, existed before Facebook - but Mark Zuckerberg's site instantly took off when it launched in 2004, proving just how rapidly an online site of this kind could take hold.

In less than a year it had one million users, and within four years it had overtaken MySpace - fuelled by innovations such as the ability to "tag" people in photos.

Taking a digital camera on a night out, then tagging your friends in dozens of pictures was a staple of teenage life in the late noughties. The constantly changing activity feed was also a big draw for early users.

By 2012, Facebook had surpassed one billion users a month and, aside from a brief blip at the end of 2021 - when daily active users dropped for the first time - the platform has continued to grow.

By expanding into less connected countries and offering free internet, the company has maintained and increased the number of Facebook users. At the end of 2023, Facebook reported it had 2.11 billion daily users.

Admittedly, Facebook is less popular than it used to be with young people. Nonetheless, it remains the most popular social network in the world, and has ushered in a new era of social activity online.

Some see Facebook and its rivals as empowering tools for connectivity. Others see them as addictive agents of destruction.

2. Facebook made our personal data valuable... and less personal

Facebook proved that collecting our likes and dislikes is extremely lucrative.

These days, Facebook's parent company Meta is an advertising giant which, alongside the likes of Google, takes the lion's share of global advertising money.

On Thursday Meta reported more than $40bn (£32bn) in revenue for the last quarter of 2023, chiefly from offering advertisers highly targeted ad services. Some $14bn was declared as profit.

But Facebook has also shown where data collection can go awry.

Meta has been fined multiple times for mishandling personal data.

The most publicised case was the Cambridge Analytica scandal in 2014, which led to Facebook paying $725m to settle legal action due to a significant data breach.

And last year, the company was issued with a record €1.2bn fine by the Irish Data Protection Commission, for transferring European users' data outside of the jurisdiction. Facebook is currently appealing against the fine.

3. Facebook made the internet political

By offering targeted advertising, Facebook has become a major platform for election campaigning around the world.

For example, in the five months leading up to the US presidential election of 2020, incumbent President Donald Trump's team spent more than $40m on Facebook adverts, according to Statista research.

Facebook has had a hand in changing grassroots politics too - by enabling disparate groups of users to gather, campaign and plan action on a global scale.

Facebook and Twitter were said to be crucial during the Arab Spring in helping to co-ordinate protests and spread the news about what was happening on the ground.

But the adoption of Facebook for political ends has been criticised for some of its consequences, including its impact on human rights. In 2018, Facebook agreed with a UN report that said it had failed to prevent people using the platform to "incite offline violence" against Rohingya people in Myanmar.

With the huge success of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg built a social network and technology empire that remains unprecedented in terms of users and its consequent power.

Up-and-coming companies, including WhatsApp, Instagram and Oculus, were all purchased and turbo-charged under the umbrella company Facebook, which changed its name to Meta in 2021.

Meta now says more than three billion people use at least one of its products every day.

And when it hasn't been able to buy its rivals, Meta has often been accused of copying them - in order to maintain its dominance.

Facebook and Instagram's disappearing Stories feature is similar to a key feature found on Snapchat; Instagram Reels is the company's answer to the challenge posed by video-sharing app TikTok; and Threads is Meta's attempt to imitate X, formerly known as Twitter.

Tactics have become more important than ever, thanks to the increased competition and a more strict regulatory environment.

In 2022, Meta was forced to sell GIF-maker Giphy at a loss after UK regulators blocked it from owning the service due to fears of over-dominance in the market.

11 memorable Facebook moments

From poking to privacy scandals, some of the highs and lows of Facebook from the last two decades.

The next 20 years?

Facebook's rise and continued dominance is testament to Mark Zuckerberg's ability to keep the site relevant.

On its 10th anniversary many outlets, including the BBC, questioned whether the platform would still be around for its 20th.

Naysayers will hesitate now before asking when its time might finally be up.

But the reality is maintaining its crown as the most popular social network will be a monumental challenge over the next 20 years.

That's not just because the industry, as always, is changing at breakneck speed - but because Meta itself is now pushing heavily towards building its business around the idea of the Metaverse.

Artificial intelligence is also a big priority for Meta.

The company is therefore, to some extent, moving on from Facebook. Whether the world is, given its enduring popularity, is another matter.

Additional reporting by Iman Mohammed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Facebook at 20: Four ways it changed the world - BBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How the world's most popular social network has altered society, business and politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Elon Musk: Australia drops case against X over stabbing videos

# data[].attributes.body
Mental.  I don’t really get how this could be classified as freedom of speech let alone a proportionate decision.  Even if you set aside the risk of further radicalisation/glorification, what about the privacy of the victims and their families  🤯

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Australia has abandoned a legal battle to have graphic footage of a church stabbing in Sydney removed from Elon Musk's social media platform X.
Declared a terror incident by police, the attack on bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel in April was livestreamed online and led to riots outside the Christ The Good Shepherd Church in Wakeley.

Australia's eSafety Commissioner, an independent regulator, threatened X and other social media companies with hefty fines if they did not remove videos of the stabbing, concerned it could incite further violence.

The case was seen as a test of Australia's ability to enforce its online safety rules on the social media giants.

The Federal Court had temporarily ordered X hide the videos - but it refused to comply saying the order was not valid.

X, formerly Twitter, did eventually block access to the video in Australia, but users could easily get around this by using a VPN.

But Commissioner Julie Inman-Grant - who herself once worked for Twitter - had asked for the video to be removed globally, prompting Mr Musk to call her a "censorship commissar".

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese responded by labelling Musk an "arrogant billionaire".

In a statement on Wednesday, Ms Inman-Grant said owing to "multiple considerations", dropping the case was "likely to achieve the most positive outcome for the online safety of all Australians, especially children".

"Our sole goal and focus in issuing our removal notice was to prevent this extremely violent footage from going viral, potentially inciting further violence and inflicting more harm on the Australian community," she said.

She added that she stood by the decisions the eSafety Commission had made - and the Minister for Communication Michelle Rowland said the same in parliament on Wednesday afternoon.

In a statement on X, the firm's Global Government Affairs team said they were "heartened to see that freedom of speech has prevailed".

It had previously argued the commission's orders were "unlawful and dangerous".

"Global takedown orders go against the very principles of a free and open internet and threaten free speech everywhere," it said in a statement.

"This was a tragic event and we do not allow people to praise it or call for further violence," it added.

Ms Inman-Grant on Wednesday told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that Mr Musk's attention resulted in a pile-on from his millions of followers - which included death threats and the personal information of her children being exposed online.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Elon Musk: Australia drops case against X over stabbing videos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The case was seen as a test of Australia's ability to enforce online safety rules on social media giants.

# data[].attributes.headline
Algorithm works to define content based on the user - FILTER BUBBLES 

# data[].attributes.subject
Algorithm works to define content based on the user - FILTER BUBBLES 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In a statement, the Prince Charles Cinema said it had been told the film "was an 'experiment in filmmaking' by a filmmaker hoping to engage in the discussion about AI and its negative impact on the arts.

"The film's content reflected this, so the hire team took the booking."

It explained the screening was subsequently cancelled following feedback which "highlighted the strong concern held by many of our audience on the use of AI in place of a writer".

"Our decision is rooted in our passion for movies and listening to those who support what we do," the cinema added.

The use of AI featured as a central point of contention in the strike by the US actors' union Sag-Aftra last year, which brought much of Hollywood to a standstill.

It continues to be a major concern for many in the entertainment industry, with programmes like ChatGPT relying heavily on copyrighted material for their development.

The issue has now made its way to the UK government's in-tray, with MPs calling for interventions to ensure artists receive fair compensation when their work is used by AI developers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Prince Charles Cinema drops AI-written film following backlash

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Prince Charles Cinema drops the private screening due to "strong concerns" of its customers.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says https://t.co/IOL2vIyoTz

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].title
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Deepfake videos have failed to disrupt election campaign as some predicted, instead existing as obviously fake memes

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says https://t.co/IOL2vIyoTz

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says https://t.co/IOL2vIyoTz
— Guardian Tech (@guardiantech) June 18, 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].title
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.entities.urls[].description
Deepfake videos have failed to disrupt election campaign as some predicted, instead existing as obviously fake memes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says https://t.co/IOL2vIyoTz

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says https://t.co/IOL2vIyoTz

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says https://t.co/IOL2vIyoTz

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].title
Deepfake video of Nigel Farage playing Minecraft ‘of course’ not real, party says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.entities.urls[].description
Deepfake videos have failed to disrupt election campaign as some predicted, instead existing as obviously fake memes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TikTok leaked documents show it actively promotes ‘beautiful people’ and minimizes visibility of less attractive users

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A lawsuit has been filed against TikTok by multiple states.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leaked documents show TikTok execs know their app harms kids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Internal documents from TikTok revealed company executives knew the app was harmful to kids and actively tried to keep them on the platform.

# data[].attributes.headline
UK safety Bill - Less addictive content 

# data[].attributes.subject
UK safety Bill - Less addictive content 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Social media companies could be forced to exclude young teens from algorithms to make content less addictive for under-16s, under a new bill with heavyweight backing from Labour, Conservatives and child protection experts.

The safer phones bill, a private member's bill from a Labour MP that has high priority in parliament, will be discussed by ministers this week.

It would also commit the government to a review of the sale of phones to teens, including a review of whether additional technological safeguards should be on phones sold to under-16s.

Josh MacAlister, the Labour MP behind the bill, will meet Peter Kyle, the technology secretary, this week to discuss potential government backing for measures in the bill.

Wes Streeting, the health secretary, praised the idea on Tuesday, posting on X: "Given the impact of smartphone use and addiction on the mental health of children and young people and the concerns from parents, this is a really timely debate."

Ministers are believed to be open-minded about some of the provisions in the bill and whether any can be applied as the Online Safety Act comes into force - though there is a strong view in government that there should be no ban on sale of phones to teenagers.

The bill is backed by the former Conservative education secretary Kit Malthouse and the new chair of the education select committee, Helen Hayes.

MacAlister, the MP for Whitehaven and Workington, will introduce his bill on Wednesday and will receive a second reading in January. Though private members' bills rarely pass in their original form, MacAlister's was fifth on the ballot, giving it more parliamentary time. Measures in the bills are regularly adopted by the government if there is widespread backing.

Before becoming an MP, MacAlister founded Frontline, a graduate social worker training programme, and previously led the independent review of children's social care.

He said: "The evidence is mounting that children doomscrolling for hours a day is causing widespread harm. We need the equivalent of the 'seatbelt' legislation for social media use for children.

"Parents are in an impossible bind over whether to ostracise their child from social media or expose them to the harms and addiction of content. Countries around the world are now taking bold action and our children risk being left behind."

Keir Starmer, the prime minister, has said he is against "simply banning" mobile phones for under-16s as some campaigners have suggested but said there was a "serious question" to be asked about what they should be allowed to access.

"All parents and everybody across the country is concerned about what can actually be accessed on a phone," he said in July.

Kyle has said previously that he is not convinced by the argument for stronger regulation of phones in schools, saying headteachers are already taking action.

But he also told the Sun: "There's nothing I take off the table when it comes to keeping children, women and girls safe in our society. I'm looking at the international evidence."

The Online Safety Act passed by the previous government has some provisions that place duties on online platforms to protect children's safety but these are not yet fully in force. Ofcom, the communications regulator, is in the process of producing guidance.

The new bill's main provisions include raising the age of internet adulthood from 13 to 16, which would change the age at which companies can get data consent from children without parental permission, a measure aimed at making it harder for companies to push addictive content to children by using their data.

It would make bans in schools a legal requirement by putting the existing guidance on a statutory footing. It would also give Ofcom a specific mandate to protect children's interests, and would commit to a review about the sale of mobile phones to under-16s and how the technology could be adapted to keep teens safer.

Malthouse said there was growing evidence of the impact of smartphones on children that was "deeply alarming". He added: "Being clear about our expectations from providers and regulators and their duties towards our children has to be a step in the right direction."

The children's commissioner for England, Dame Rachel de Souza, and her predecessor Anne Longfield have also given their backing to the bill, as has the National Education Union. The former children's minister Claire Coutinho has also said recently that she hoped the government would go further in regulating children's smartphone use.

A government spokesperson said there were no plans as yet to back legislation for a ban on phones in schools.

"The Online Safety Act will introduce strong safeguards for children, preventing them from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content," they said. "The vast majority of schools already handle the use of mobile phones effectively, including with bans. Legislating for an outright ban would simply remove the autonomy from school leaders who know their pupils and their communities best."

MacAlister introduced his bill as a group of charities warned Starmer his government could be putting lives at risk if it does not expose smaller websites to the toughest scrutiny possible under new online safety laws.

Charities including the Samaritans, Mind and the Molly Rose Foundation urged No 10 to designate websites promoting disorderly eating or suicide as "category 1" sites that are subject to enhanced scrutiny by Ofcom.

However, the regulator has recommended that such sites do not receive category 1 status and has instead established dedicated supervision teams to manage "small but risky" services.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New UK bill could force social media firms to make content less addictive for under 16s

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The safer phones bill could ban companies from applying algorithms for young 'doomscrolling' teens

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Social media algorithms need overhaul in wake of Southport riots, Ofcom says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Watchdog issues warning over misinformation after trouble that flared following killing of three girls on Merseyside

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Heartbroken mom claims 14-year-old son killed himself after ‘falling in love’ with Game of Thrones AI chatbot

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sewell Setzer III passed away at the age of 14 in February earlier this year

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There will be no exemptions on the age limit for children who have consent from their parents. The government says that the onus will be on social media platforms to show they are taking reasonable steps to prevent access.

Albanese said there would be no penalties for users, and that it would be up to Australia's online regulator - the eSafety Commissioner - to enforce the laws.

The legislation would come into force 12 months after it passes and be subject to a review after it's in place.

While most experts agree that social media platforms can harm the mental health of adolescents, many are split over the efficacy of trying to outlaw them all together.

Some experts argue that bans only delay young people's exposure to apps such as TikTok, Instagram and Facebook, instead of teaching them how to navigate complex online spaces.

Previous attemptsat restricting access, including by the European Union, have largely failed or faced backlash from tech firms. And questions remain over how implementation would work given there are tools which can circumvent age-verification requirements.

One of Australia's largest advocacy groups for child rights has criticised the proposed ban as "too blunt an instrument".

In an open letter sent to the government in October, signed by over 100 academics and 20 civil society organisations, the Australian Child Rights Taskforce called on Albanese to instead look at imposing "safety standards" on social media platforms.

The group also pointed to UN advice that "national policies" designed to regulate online spaces "should be aimed at providing children with the opportunity to benefit from engaging with the digital environment and ensuring their safe access to it".

But othergrassroots campaignershave lobbied Australia's government for the laws, saying bans are needed to protect children from harmful content, misinformation, bullying and other social pressures.

A petition by the 36Months initiative, which has over 125,000 signatures, argues children are "not yet ready to navigate online social networks safely" until at least 16, and that currently "excessive social media use is rewiring young brains within a critical window of psychological development, causing an epidemic of mental illness".

When asked whether there should be broader efforts to educate children about how to navigate the benefits and risks of being online, Albanese said that such an approach would be insufficient because it "assumes an equal power relationship".

"I don't know about you, but I get things popping up on my system that I don't want to see. Let alone a vulnerable 14-year-old," he told reporters on Thursday.

"These tech companies are incredibly powerful. These apps have algorithms that drive people towards certain behaviour."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Australia plans social media ban for under-16s

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The government says it wants to mitigate the "harm" social media is inflicting on children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Australian government has pledged to legislate an age limit of 16 years for social media access, with penalties for online platforms that do not comply.

But the Labor government has not spelled out how it expects Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and others to actually enforce that age limit. Anthony Albanese is facing pressure from the Coalition opposition to rush the bill through parliament in the next three weeks, although a federal trial into age assurance technology has not yet commenced.

Albanese and the communications minister, Michelle Rowland, did not rule out the potential for social media users to have their faces subject to biometric scanning, for online platforms to verify users' ages using a government database, or for all social media users - regardless of age - being subject to age checks, only saying it would be up to tech companies to set their own processes.

The prime minister confirmed the age limit at a press conference on Thursday, in the latest step of the government's increasing scrutiny on major tech platforms, with plans to introduce legislation into parliament this month. His government had announced its plan to legislate an age limit but had been deliberating on where to set that threshold, with expectations it would be between 14 and 16.

But questions have been raised, and remain unanswered, about how it could be effectively enforced.

The onus would be on social media platforms to "demonstrate they are taking reasonable steps to prevent access" for young people, Albanese said. There would be no penalties for users who managed to access social media under the age of 16, or their parents, but Rowland said there would be penalties for platforms that did not heed the new laws.

"The eSafety commissioner will have responsibility for enforcement and there needs to be enhanced penalties to ensure compliance," she said, saying current penalties below $1m in existing legislation were not sufficient.

Albanese raised concern about the effect of social media on young people, including the potential for content related to misogyny or body image, as his reasoning for the new laws. He said he had spoken to "thousands" of parents and other adults about the issue.

"They, like me, are worried sick about the safety of our kids online," he said. "I want Australian parents and families to know that government has your back. I want parents to be able to say, 'Sorry, mate, that's against the law.'"

Rowland said platforms would "need to take reasonable steps" to assure themselves of a user's age. The government is still conducting a trial, funded in the May budget, of potential age-assurance technology options.

The UK, which has implemented age-assurance legislation, outlined potential options including allowing banks or mobile providers to confirm a user is over 18, credit checks, use of facial estimation technology and asking users to upload a photo to the site that is then matched with photo ID.

Advice provided to the Australian government stated "no countries have implemented an age verification mandate without issue".

A roadmap for age verification, released last year by the eSafety commissioner - to be tasked with enforcing the new age limit - recommended a "double-blind tokenised approach" where a third-party provider would transfer information between sites and age-assurance providers to protect user privacy. The roadmap found the age-assurance market was "immature but developing".

The shadow communications minister, David Coleman, said the issue was "urgent" and called for the bill to be rushed through by the end of November - even before the age assurance trial reports on what options exist to enforce that law.

The government has not put a timeline on when it wants the bill passed, but has not ruled out legislating before the trial gives its findings.

Albanese and Rowland did not answer directly when asked if Australians should prepare for having their faces scanned or their identity documents verified to access social media.

skip past newsletter promotion

Sign up to Breaking News Australia

Get the most important news as it breaks
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion

Rowland said such questions would be answered by the age-assurance trial but added: "These platforms know their users better than anyone."

Albanese cited the example of some young people managing to access alcohol, despite an age limit of 18, in conceding that the laws would not stop all social media access.

"What we are wanting to state upfront, from the very beginning, is we don't pretend that you can get a 100% outcome here," he said.

"We don't argue that the changes that we will be legislating will fix everything immediately ... But those laws set what the parameters are for our society and they assist in ensuring the right outcomes."

Asked if all social media users, regardless of age, would need to verify they were over 18, Rowland said that would be up to the tech companies.

The parent company of Facebook and Instagram, Meta, said it would comply with the legislation if required, but questioned whether the technology was ready.

"The idea that somehow you can sort of force the industry to be in a technological place that it isn't, is probably a bit misunderstood in terms of where the industry is," Meta's global head of safety, Antigone Davis, told reporters on Thursday.

Meta has argued that app stores such as those run by Apple and Google should bear the burden of enforcement, pointing out teens can use up to 40 different apps which would all require age checks.

Davis said requiring age assurance for each app would be complicated, time-consuming and presented a privacy risk.

"The current state of age-assurance technology ... requires a level of personally identified information to be shared," she said.

"It's usually in the form of an ID or document ID, documentation or biometric type data, facial feature data for young people, and if it's parental consent, the data that will be involved there to verify the parent is just another additional layer of data to establish."

Snapchat and Google were also approached for comment. TikTok declined to comment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Australia to ban under-16s from social media - but can't say how TikTok, Instagram and others will enforce it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Meta says it will comply if required, but the technology is not ready to enforce proposed age limit across up to 40 apps

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
892 reactions · 13 shares | Automatic protections for teens | With new Instagram Teen Accounts, content is automatically filtered to help make sure what teenagers see is age-appropriate. | By Instagram | Facebook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With new Instagram Teen Accounts, content is automatically filtered to help make sure what teenagers see is age-appropriate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Guardian will no longer post on Elon Musk’s X from its official accounts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Platform’s coverage of US election crystallised longstanding concerns about its content, says Guardian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
20M views · 303K reactions | She's trying her best not to laugh 😭😭 #billieeilish | Deep Singing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
She's trying her best not to laugh 😭😭 #billieeilish.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Swiped: The School That Banned Smartphones review – makes you long to lock your own device in a box

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This three-week experiment to study the horrifying effects of the grim content that children can access 24/7 has predictable results – which are nonetheless horrifying

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In many of the podcast episodes, the guests claimed to know a simple solution to health issues which they believed mainstream institutions were hiding from the public. They often also advertised their products on the podcast.

Cancer researcher Dr Thomas Seyfried appeared on the podcast in October. He is a proponent of using the ketogenic diet, a diet low in carbohydrates and high in fat, to treat cancer.

But Dr Grimes told us doctors warned patients against restricting their diet while undergoing cancer treatment.

"You could potentially and very realistically get very, very, sick and have a much worse health outcome than if you followed recommended advice from your oncologists," he said.

In the podcast, Dr Seyfried also suggested radiotherapy and chemotherapy only improved patients' lifespan by one-to-two months, comparing modern cancer treatments to "medieval cures".

Mr Bartlett did not react to this claim.

Cancer Research UK statistics show that UK cancer survival has doubled in the past 50 years. In the US, the cancer death rate has declined 33% since 1990, thanks to modern treatments.

Dr Thomas Seyfried told us he "stands by the statements that he made in the interview".

The solutions these guests are offering are appealing to listeners as they feel tangible and come without the side effects of pharmaceutical drugs, says Prof Heidi Larson, an expert in public confidence in healthcare.

"But they [the guests] are way overstretching. It sends people away from evidence-based medicine. They stop doing things that might have some side effects, even though it could save their life."

Cécile Simmons, from the Institute of Strategic Dialogue, a think tank specialising in disinformation research, believes this type of content can help to grow audiences.

"Health-related clickbait content with scary titles does really well online with the algorithm amplifying that," she said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Steven Bartlett sharing harmful health misinformation on Diary of CEO podcast

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Disproven health claims are accepted with little challenge by host on number one podcast, BBC investigation finds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Meta envisages social media filled with AI-generated users

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
US tech group is rolling out a range of artificial intelligence tools to drive engagement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Court strikes down US net neutrality rules - BBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The ruling marks a significant moment in the long running battle over how to regulate internet providers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The ‘AI’ blog posts that duped NYE revellers with hoax fireworks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Blogs and social media posts online promoted a ‘spectacular midnight show’ in Centenary Square, despite no such fireworks display taking place in the city since 2016.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Taxi-driver jailed for social media posts which encouraged violent disorder

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Andrew McIntyre, 39, set up a Telegram channel in the aftermath of the Southport knife attack in which three young girls were killed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Meta axing fact checkers on Facebook and Instagram to rely on ‘community notes’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
News feeds will also be filled with more political content

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Molly Russell’s dad urges Keir Starmer to act on online safety in letter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In an exclusive interview, Ian Russell tells the BBC that he believes there is “no real movement” within government on online safety.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Aimee Monaghan-Richardson on LinkedIn: #ai #creativerights #media #pr #marketing #creatives #creativeindustries… | 72 comments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A RARE Moment in UK Media 🤯 For the VERY first time, every major UK newspaper has featured the same front page, highlighting the Creative Rights in AI… | 72 comments on LinkedIn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Customers’ photos and documents stored online will no longer be protected by end-to-end encryption.