Australia – LSD News

Social media bans on teens risk strengthening Big Tech’s grip on the sector, Bluesky exec warns

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Sat, 06 Jun 2026 08:48:15 +0000

This photograph shows a set up smart-phone screen displaying the logo of main social media platforms including Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, Telegram, X, Bluesky, Tiktok and Whatsapp.

Martin Lelievre | Afp | Getty Images

Government action to ban social media platforms risks strengthening Big Tech’s grip on the industry further, limiting access for smaller players, an exec at BlueSky has warned.

Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, told CNBC on the sidelines of SXSW in London on Wednesday that the smaller open-source platform isn’t opposed to regulation but that smaller players in the industry should be protected.

“I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team,” Wang said.

“So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces,” she added.

The open-source platform was created within X, formerly known as Twitter, in 2019 and endorsed by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey. Bluesky spun off in 2021 and soon after gained prominence as a rival to the Elon Musk-owned platform. It’s since grown to 43 million users as of March, which is still only around 10% of X’s estimated 450 million users.

Bluesky has struggled to maintain popularity, and by the end of October last year, it had reportedly seen a 40% drop in daily mobile active users over the past 12 months. Wang said the company has around 40 employees.

Bluesky was launched as a Twitter rival — but it’s far less popular. Now it’s eyeing Reddit for inspiration

“These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do… so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right,” Wang explained.

While governments say they’re looking to protect young people, tech firms have pushed back, arguing that the measures won’t necessarily prevent teens from seeing harmful content and will ultimately cut off teens from friends and community.

Australia was the first to enforce a blanket social media ban for teens under the age of 16-years-old in December, with major social media platforms like Meta’s Instagram, ByteDance’s TikTok, Alphabet’s YouTube, Elon Musk’s X, and Reddit forced to implement age verification methods such as facial estimation through selfies, uploaded ID documents, or linked bank details.

Fines for not complying can reach up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($35 million) if they fail to take “reasonable steps” to comply. Bluesky also introduced age assurance checks to keep under-16s off its platform, according to Australia’s eSafety Commissioner.

Australia’s ban set a precedent, with several countries worldwide looking to propose similar legislation, including the U.K., Spain, France, and Austria. In the U.S., state-level legislation is looking more likely than a national ban.

“I just want to end here with not saying that regulation is bad; it’s that regulation needs to work together with innovation,” Wang said.

“I think that there needs to be basically more channels between the smaller, medium-sized players and small businesses with regulators, because they need to be protected, while also then the very Big tech players who we know are circumventing regulation need to be regulated, and so I think that nuance can be struck.”

Choose CNBC as your preferred source on Google and never miss a moment from the most trusted name in business news.

Sri Lanka, Australia seek to expand trade and tourism ties

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Sun, 31 May 2026 10:54:00 +0000

High-level discussions have been held to expand trade and tourism ties between Sri Lanka and Australia.

Discussions were held between Minister of Foreign Affairs Vijitha Hearth, who is currently visiting New Zealand and Australia and several members of the Australian Parliament from Victoria this afternoon.

Minister Herath in a post on X (formally Twitter), noted that during the meeting both factions explored means of enhancing Parliamentary cooperation, strengthening government-to-government partnerships, supporting the Sri Lankan diaspora and expanding trade and tourism ties.

Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath also appreciated the MPs for their continued support to the Sri Lankan community in Australia.

Countries around the world are considering teen social media bans – why experts warn it’s a ‘lazy’ fix

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 10:06:36 +0000

Gen Z girl looking at smartphone screen feeling upset scrolling on social media.

Mementojpeg | Moment | Getty Images

Governments around the world are making efforts to crack down on teen social media use amid mounting evidence of potential harms, but critics argue blanket bans are an ineffective quick fix.

Australia became the first country to enforce a sweeping social media ban for under-16s in December, requiring platforms like Meta’s Instagram, ByteDance’s TikTok, Alphabet’s YouTube, Elon Musk’s X, and Reddit to implement age verification measures or face penalties.

Several European countries are now looking to follow Australia’s lead, with the U.K., Spain, France, and Austria drafting their own proposals. Although a national ban in the U.S. looks unlikely, state-level legislation is underway.

It comes after Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and Threads, faced two separate defeats in trials related to child safety and social media harms in March.

A Santa Fe jury found Meta misled users about child safety on its apps. The next day, a Los Angeles jury ruled that Meta and YouTube designed platform features that contributed to a plaintiff’s mental health harms.

Meta’s stock drops almost 8% as 2 court defeats add to Zuckerberg’s recent woes

These developments are set to “unleash a lot more legislation,” Sonia Livingstone, social psychology professor and director of the London School of Economics’ Digital Futures for Children center, told CNBC.

However, Livingstone said a social media ban for teens is a slapdash solution from governments that have failed to properly police tech giants for years.

“I think the argument for a ban is an admission of failure that we cannot regulate companies, so we can only restrict children,” she said, explaining that the U.S. and Europe already have a lot of legislation in the books that isn’t being enforced.

“When are governments really going to enforce, raise the stakes on fines, ban the companies if necessary for not complying,” she added.

Enforce existing laws

Experts argue the sector has for too long escaped accountability and the rigid requirements faced by other industries.

“[Governments] should be implementing the law [and] big tech companies should be facing a slew of regulatory interventions that forbid a whole series of practices that they currently do,” Livingstone said.

She highlighted the U.K.’s Online Safety Act, which “requires safety by design” — this means features such as Snapchat’s “Quick Add” that invite teens to befriend others should be stopped, according to Livingstone.

Livingstone believes that a blanket ban wouldn’t even be under discussion if social media companies had undergone appropriate premarket testing to establish if their features are safe for their target audience.

“There are lots of areas where we have a well functioning market that requires testing to establish it meets the standards…[before products] can go into the market,” she said. “If we did that for AI and for social media, we would be in a whole different place and we’d not be having to talk about banning children from anything.”

Josh Golin, executive director at Boston-based non-profit Fairplay, told CNBC that he’d like to see “privacy and safety by design legislation rather than blanket bans” across the U.S.

This includes passing the Children and Teen Online Privacy Protection Act to put a stop to personal data-driven advertising towards children, so there’s “less financial incentive for social media companies to target and addict kids.”

Golin added that passing the Senate’s version of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is also key to ensuring platforms are held legally responsible for design features that can cause addiction or other harms.

He added that Meta has already successfully lobbied to stop KOSA even though it passed the Senate in 2024. But, if it continues to block legislation further, Golin thinks this could see further pressure “line up behind bans because addictive and unsafe is not OK.”

A ban is ‘lazy’ and ‘unfair’

A sweeping social media ban only punishes a generation of young people who have become increasingly dependent on online means of interaction, according to Livingstone. She said bans are a “lazy” solution from governments and an “unfair” outcome for young people.

“It’s the 15 years in which we don’t let our children go outside and meet their friends. It’s the 15 years in which we stopped funding parks and youth clubs for them to meet in,” she said.

“So a ban now is to say to ‘Children, we can’t make the regulation work. We can’t update it fast enough. We haven’t built you anything else to do, but that’s just tough. We’ve terrified your parents into feeling that there’s nothing they can do, and we’re going to take you away from the service where you hoped you would feel some sociability and entertainment.”

A ‘quiet revolution’: Why young people are swapping social media for lunch dates, vinyl records and brick phones

Dr. Victoria Nash, associate professor and senior policy fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute, described social media bans as an “extreme” measure that alienates young people from the benefits these platforms provide.

“We know children and young people get their news online and through apps, so you cut that off,” she said. “My view would be that I don’t think this justifies a ban. To me, what this justifies is more responsible behavior by social platforms to cut down on their most harmful features.”

She said that bans could drive young people and children to less regulated corners of the internet, which don’t have the same protections.

Many Australian teens flouted the social media ban when it first came into force in December. A BBC report found that downloads of VPNs, which hide users’ locations to avoid country-specific restrictions, increased before the ban.

Additionally, downloads of some apps that weren’t yet affected such as Lemon8, Yope and Discord also surged in the days after the law came into effect, per the report.

“I think it [a ban] certainly gets rid of all the harmful aspects, but it gets rid of the good ones too and I’m just not yet sure if that’s proportionate,” Nash added.

Choose CNBC as your preferred source on Google and never miss a moment from the most trusted name in business news.

Australia to halve tax on petrol to bring down costs in wake of Iran war

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 04:23:30 +0000

Australia will halve the tax on fuel and diesel for three months in a push to bring down costs that have surged due to the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, Prime Minister Anthony ⁠Albanese said on Monday.

The halving of the tax, known as the fuel excise, would reduce the cost of fuel by 26.3 Australian cents per litre, Albanese said.

‘‘We understand the cost pressures for people are very real ⁠as the impact of the war on the other side of the world plays out right here,’‘ Albanese told ⁠a press conference in Canberra.

The government would also pause the road user charge ⁠on heavy vehicles for three months.

The measures are expected to cost ⁠the government A$2.55 billion ($1.75 billion).

Source: Reuters

-Agencies

Flights are already getting more expensive after jet fuel spike. When should you book?

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Thu, 12 Mar 2026 17:15:55 +0000

Travelers wait in line at a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoint at William P. Hobby Airport in Houston, Texas, US, on Monday, March 9, 2026.

Mark Felix | Bloomberg | Getty Images

The surge in fuel prices since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran nearly two weeks ago is already driving up airfare. Consumers’ appetite for travel this year will dictate just how much.

Cathay Pacific on Thursday said it would roughly double fuel surcharges on tickets starting March 18.

Earlier this week, Australia’s Qantas said it is raising fares to help cover its costs, Scandinavian Airlines said the “unusually rapid and substantial increase” in fuel prompted it to raise prices, and Air New Zealand pulled its financial outlook “until fuel markets and operating conditions stabilise,” adding that it has made “initial fare adjustments.”

“If the conflict leads to continued elevated jet fuel costs, the airline may need to take further pricing action and adjust its network and schedule as required,” Air New Zealand said.

U.S. airline CEOs and other executives will update investors on Tuesday at the J.P. Morgan Industrials Conference in Washington, D.C.

Analysts expect an earnings hit at least in the first quarter if not the first half of the year, though the impact will depend on how long higher fuel prices last.

“We think a hit to 1Q EPS appears almost certain at this point,” UBS airline analysts Atul Maheswari and Thomas Wadewitz wrote in a note last week.

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said last week on the sidelines of an event at Harvard University that higher fares were likely on the way because of the surge in fuel prices.

Kirby said travel demand is still strong, however. Two other senior airline executives at U.S. carriers, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak to media, also said travel demand has held up. If those trends persist, it could give airlines more pricing power, but that will depend on the war’s duration.

“Airlines never met a higher fare they didn’t want,” said Scott Keyes, founder of flight deal company Going, previously known as Scott’s Cheap Flights.

So what should consumers do?

Keyes said travelers can’t lose by booking early, as long as they’re not buying restrictive basic economy tickets. That way, customers can try to exchange or cancel their tickets and buy cheaper ones if airfare ends up falling.

“If you book a $500 summer flight today, and two weeks from now the price drops to $350, you can call up the airline and get the $150 difference back as a credit. Heads you win; tails the airlines lose,” he said.

Fuel costs

Jet fuel is airlines’ biggest cost after labor, accounting for about a fifth or more of expenses, depending on the airline.

United alone spent $11.4 billion last year on fuel, at an average price of $2.44 a gallon, according to a securities filing. U.S. jet fuel on Wednesday was going for $3.78 a gallon, according to Platts.

Jefferies airline analyst Sheila Kahyaoglu said in a note Thursday that she expects “the most acute financial impact to airlines from surging oil prices to be in the next 30-90 days as airlines have been booking yields for close-in flights assuming a much lower fuel price and carriers cannot retroactively raise fares.”

She said Delta Air Lines and United, which produce most U.S. airline profits, are better positioned than other carriers because of their high-end demand. Risks to demand, particularly for more price-sensitive customers, include the recent jump in gasoline prices.

Jet fuel has more than doubled in some regions since the first U.S.–Israel attacks on Iran on Feb. 28.

Oil prices surged to roughly four-year highs after the initial strikes. Energy prices have swung wildly since then as traders assess just how long the war — and all the logistics headaches — could last.

U.S. jet fuel prices were up more than 60% from before the attacks to a peak last week, according to pricing data assessed by Platts. Jet fuel can rise by a greater degree than crude because it includes the price of processing and ever-more difficult and costly transportation from oil fields to refineries to airplane fuel tanks.

On Feb. 27, the day before the before the attacks, the cost to fill the fuel tanks of a Boeing 737-800 would have would have been about $17,000 based on average prices in New York, Houston, Chicago and Los Angeles, compiled by Argus. Less than a week later, on March 5, it would have cost more than $27,000, based on Argus prices. On Tuesday, after oil prices fell following President Donald Trump’s comment that the Iran war could end “very soon,” it would have cost around $23,000.

Line Service Technician Austin Beadles refuels a plane using a Federal Aviation Administration approved unleaded aviation fuel at Sheltair at Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport in Broomfield on Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2026. Sheltair, a fixed-base operator, will offer the Swift UL94 unleaded aviation alternative gas to pilots. (Photo by Matthew Jonas/MediaNews Group/Boulder Daily Camera via Getty Images)

Matthew Jonas | Boulder Daily Camera | MediaNews Group | Getty Images

After prior fuel price surges, airlines started making customers pay for bags — or charging them more. Even seemingly minor changes in weight can save airlines hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars, a year in fuel. United in 2018 changed to a lighter paper stock for its in-flight magazine. In 2014, American Airlines said it would switch to digital manuals for flight attendants, following changes for pilots. It said at the time that it would save $650,000 in fuel a year.

All about capacity

High fuel prices don’t automatically mean higher fares. The ongoing strong demand for travel is a key factor and so is capacity, or the amount that carriers fly.

If airlines raise fares and passengers balk, then capacity will likely go down in the form of fewer frequencies on a route or broader cuts, in more severe cases.

“Airlines love to say fuel is expensive so you have to pay more. What they’re doing is they’re setting the expectation,” said Courtney Miller, founder of Visual Approach Analytics, an airline industry advisory firm. “They price to prevent empty seats.”

If fuel prices come down, “they’re not suddenly saying ‘We’re making too much money,'” Miller added. “But they are likely to add another flight.”

Capacity, especially to and from the Middle East, is constrained because of airspace closures and other stop-and-start flights. More than 46,000 flights have been canceled to and from the region since the Feb. 28 attacks began, aviation data firm Cirium said.

Those constraints are driving up fares as well as demand, as United’s Kirby said, from regions where customers are looking for alterative routes.

Airspace closures are also requiring airlines to take longer, more fuel-guzzling routes, but many have strong demand, too.

Qantas, for example, told CNBC that its flight from Perth, Australia, to London is temporarily stopping in Singapore to refuel, allowing it to pick up another 60 customers, and that its Perth-London and Perth-Paris routes are more than 90% full this month, 15 percentage points higher than normal for this time of year.

Finnair said the increased demand for travel to Asia from Helsinki has pushed up its prices by 15% on average.

“The impact of higher fuel prices will be reflected in market fares with a delay, as airlines typically hedge at least part of their fuel purchases,” it said.

Airlines have been grappling with airspace closures for years, including from on-and-off conflict in the Middle East and since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, that have left a large swath of airspace out of use for many carriers.

‘You can’t dry up an airport’

Most U.S. airlines no longer hedge fuel costs, or lock in prices using futures and other securities. Southwest Airlines was one of the last holdouts, and it quit last year. A spokesman for the Dallas-based airline told CNBC that Southwest currently has “no plans” to resume hedging.

That leaves U.S. carriers more susceptible to price swings.

Travelers at William P. Hobby Airport in Houston, Texas, US, on Monday, March 9, 2026.

Mark Felix | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Kirby said there would likely be an impact to United’s first-quarter results and to the second quarter if the war — and blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping channel — persists. However, he said demand was increasing sharply from regions that have been affected by the thousands of flight cancellations and airspace closures in the Middle East.

Because of airlines’ upbeat outlooks on demand to start the year, “the environment is conducive for passing along fare increases. Further, should jet fuel stay higher for longer, it should help push off-peak capacity lower,” supporting unit revenues, UBS analysts said.

Rick Joswick, who heads of near-term oil research and analytics at S&P Global Energy, told CNBC that “demand for jet fuel is inelastic. You cannot shortchange an airport. If the cost of jet fuel goes up, it’s not like the plane will choose not to fly that day.

“You can’t dry up an airport,” he said.

Who will be next to implement an Australia-style under-16s social media ban?

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Sun, 18 Jan 2026 08:30:17 +0000

Recently the Australian Senate passed a law to ban children under 16 from having social media accounts including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X.

Matt Cardy | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Australia’s social media ban for under-16s has grabbed global attention, and governments worldwide are considering implementing similar policies, with the U.K. seen as likely to be next.

The Australian government’s Online Safety Amendment Act came into effect on December 10, and included major social media platforms including Reddit, X, Meta’s Instagram, Alphabet’s YouTube, Bytedance’s TikTok.

The platforms were forced to implement age verification methods to ensure under-16s are unable to create an account, and the companies can face fines up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32 million) for not complying.

Although teenagers, tech giants, and experts have had mixed reactions since the ban came into force, governments globally are drafting bills to implement an Australia-style ban.

“This is a global issue, and governments everywhere are under pressure to respond,” Daisy Greenwell, co-founder of U.K.-based Smartphone Free Childhood, told CNBC. SFC is a grassroots campaign urging parents to delay giving children smartphones and social media access.

“We’re already seeing countries move in this direction, and as confidence builds and evidence accumulates, more will follow. No one thinks the status quo is working for children, parents, or society – and this is one of the clearest policy responses currently on the table,” Greenwell added.

Other countries that are considering an under-16s social media ban include the U.K., France, Denmark, Spain, Germany, Italy and Greece.

The U.S. is trailing behind on this front with a national ban being unlikely, however there is certainly state and local interest, according to Ravi Iyer, a managing director of the University of Southern California Marshall School’s Neely Center.

Iyer has worked closely with social psychologist Jonathon Haidt who wrote the renowned book The Anxious Generation, about the harmful impacts of social media and smartphones on children and teens.

“It’s really hard to predict Federal policy, but it is one of the few bipartisan issues left, so it certainly is possible,” Iyer said in emailed comments.

“I’m more confident at the state level and I believe we will see a few U.S. states enact such a policy in the next couple years.”

Lawmakers in California and Texas are looking at bringing in state-level bans in 2026.

But governments looking to implement such bans could face resistance from the tech giants.

Following Australia’s move, community-focused forum Reddit launched a lawsuit, arguing that the new law goes too far by restricting political discussion online. Facebook and Instagram owner Meta urged Canberra to reconsider the ban. And in a statement to users explaining how the restrictions work, Elon Musk’s X said: “It’s not our choice – it’s what the Australian law requires.”

U.K. set to vote on social media ban

Meanwhile, calls for a social media ban for under-16s in the U.K. have grown rapidly at the beginning of this year. The U.K.’s House of Lords is expected to vote this week to amend the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to include a social media ban for under-16s.

Greenwell’s SFC launched an email campaign this week, which saw more than 100,000 emails sent to local U.K. lawmakers. The SFC template email urged the government to set “reasonable, age-appropriate boundaries that protect children’s wellbeing.”

“We consistently see that the more time children spend on smartphones and social media, the worse their mental health outcomes tend to be. If these platforms are no longer available, the network effects collapse – and young people can reconnect with each other and with the real world,” Greenwell told CNBC.

This is the right age to give your child a smartphone, according to an NYU mental health researcher

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has even backed the idea saying “we need to better protect children from social media” and that he’s studying Australia’s ban.

“All options are on the table in relation to what further protections we can put in place – whether that’s under-16s on social media or an issue I am very concerned about, under fives and screen time,” Starmer said last week.

“Children are turning up age four at reception [the first year of school] having spent far too much time on screens,” he added.

Meanwhile, U.K. health secretary Wes Streeting asked The Anxious Generation author Haidt to address his officials at an event to push for stricter limits on young people.

France is also a strong contender as it debates two bills, one backed by French President Emmanuel Macron, to prevent social media access for under 15s, France24 reported last week. France’s public health watchdog ANSES outlined that social media’s negative effects are “numerous” and well documented.

USC’s Iyer said that if a teen ban becomes a global norm, it alleviates the pressure on young people to self-police.

“One of the primary goals of the law is to change the norm, such that teens don’t feel pressure to use social media because all their friends are doing so” Iyer said.

“It’s not really a realistic choice to abstain if you feel that all your friends are using a particular platform. If we can solve that problem and the majority of teens are off of social media, we’ll have done a lot of good,” he added.

Australia is trying to enforce the first teen social media ban. Governments worldwide are watching.

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Wed, 10 Dec 2025 10:53:56 +0000

In this photo illustration, iPhone screens display various social media apps on the screens on February 9, 2025 in Bath, England.

Anna Barclay | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Australia on Wednesday became the first country to formally bar users under the age of 16 from accessing major social media platforms, a move expected to be closely monitored by global tech companies and policymakers around the world.

Canberra’s ban, which came into effect from midnight local time, targets 10 major services, including Alphabet‘s YouTube, Meta’s Instagram, ByteDance’s TikTok, Reddit, Snapchat and Elon Musk’s X.

The controversial rule requires these platforms to take “reasonable steps” to prevent underage access, using age–verification methods such as inference from online activity, facial estimation via selfies, uploaded IDs, or linked bank details.

All targeted platforms had agreed to comply with the policy to some extent. Elon Musk’s X had been one of the last holdouts, but signaled on Wednesday that it would comply.

The policy means millions of Australian children are expected to have lost access to their social accounts.

However, the impact of the policy could be even wider, as it will set a benchmark for other governments considering teen social media bans, including Denmark, Norway, France, Spain, Malaysia and New Zealand.

Controversial rollout

Ahead of the legislation’s passage last year, a YouGov survey found that 77% of Australians backed the under-16 social media ban. Still, the rollout has faced some resistance since becoming law.

Supporters of the bill have argued it safeguards children from social media-linked harms, including cyberbullying, mental health issues, and exposure to predators and pornography.

Among those welcoming the official ban on Wednesday was Jonathan Haidt, social psychologist and author of The Anxious Generation, a 2024 best-selling book that linked a growing mental health crisis to smartphone and social media usage, especially for the young.

In a post on social media platform X, Haidt commended policymakers in Australia for “freeing kids under 16 from the social media trap.”

“There will surely be difficulties in the early months, but the world is rooting for your success, and many other nations will follow,” he added.

On the other hand, opponents contend that the ban infringes on freedoms of expression and access to information, raises privacy concerns through invasive age verification, and represents excessive government intervention that undermines parental responsibility.

Those critics include groups like Amnesty Tech, which said in a statement Tuesday that the ban was an ineffective fix that ignored the rights and realities of younger generations.

“The most effective way to protect children and young people online is by protecting all social media users through better regulation, stronger data protection laws and better platform design,” said Amnesty Tech Programme Director Damini Satija.

Meanwhile, David Inserra, a fellow for free expression and technology at the Cato Institute, warned in a blog post that children would evade the new policy by shifting to new platforms, private apps like Telegram, or VPNs, driving them to “more isolated communities and platforms with fewer protections” where monitoring is harder.

Tech companies like Google have also warned that the policy could be extremely difficult to enforce, while government-commissioned reports have pointed to inaccuracies in age–verification technology, such as selfie-based age–guessing software.

Indeed, on Wednesday, local reports in Australia indicated that many children had already bypassed the ban, with age-assurance tools misclassifying users, and workarounds such as VPNs proving effective.

However, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had attempted to preempt these issues, acknowledging in an opinion piece on Sunday that the system would not work flawlessly from the start, likening it to liquor laws.

“The fact that teenagers occasionally find a way to have a drink doesn’t diminish the value of having a clear national standard,” he added.

Experts told CNBC that the rollout is expected to continue to face challenges and that regulators would need to take a trial-and-error approach.

“There’s a fair amount of teething problems around it. Many young people have been posting on TikTok that they successfully evaded the age limitations and that’s to be expected,” said Terry Flew, a professor of digital communication and culture at the University of Sydney.

“You were never going to get 100% disappearance of every person under the age of 16 from every one of the designated platforms on day one,” he added.

Global implications

Experts told CNBC that the policy rollout in Australia will be closely watched by tech firms and lawmakers worldwide, as other countries consider their own moves to ban or restrict teen social media usage.

“Governments are responding to how public expectations have changed about the internet and social media, and the companies have not been particularly responsive to moral suasion,” said Flew.

“We see similar pressures are emerging, particularly, but not exclusively in Europe,” he added.

The European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution in November advocating a minimum age of 16 for social media access, allowing parental consent for 13 to 15-year-olds.

The bloc has also proposed banning addictive features such as infinite scrolling and auto-play for minors, which could lead to EU-wide enforcement against non-compliant platforms.

Outside Europe, Malaysia and New Zealand have also been advancing proposals to ban social media for children under 16.

However, laws elsewhere are expected to differ from Australia’s, whether that be regarding age restrictions or age verification processes.

“My hope is that countries that are looking at implementing similar policies will monitor for what doesn’t work in Australia and learn from our mistakes,” said Tama Leaver, professor at the Department of Internet Studies at Curtin University and a Chief Investigator in the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child.

“I think platforms and tech companies are also starting to realize that if they don’t want age-gating policies everywhere, they’re going to have to do much better at providing safer, appropriate experiences for young users.”

Australia updates student visa evidence levels: Sri Lanka now among low-risk countries

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Tue, 30 Sep 2025 17:49:50 +0000

The Australian Department of Home Affairs has recently updated evidence levels for student visa applications, as noted via the PRISMS system.

While these levels are not officially published, the department uses them to assess the documentation required for student visa applications under the Simplified Student Visa Framework (SSVF).

Current Understanding of Country Evidence Levels

Based on information circulated within official education and immigration networks, countries are currently categorized as follows:

Level 1: Bangladesh, Sri Lanka

Level 2: India, Bhutan, Vietnam, China, Nepal

Level 3: Fiji, Philippines, Pakistan

Evidence levels are part of Australia’s risk-management approach to international education, reflecting past student visa compliance and other immigration outcomes.

How Evidence Levels Work

Both education providers and countries of citizenship are assigned evidence levels (Level 1, 2, or 3). The combination of these two factors determines how much documentation a student must provide.

Provider Evidence Levels

All institutions registered under the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS) are assigned an evidence level:

Level 1: Low-risk institutions – minimal extra documentation required.

Level 2: Moderate-risk institutions – additional evidence may be requested depending on the student’s country.

Level 3: High-risk institutions – strictest requirements and higher scrutiny.

Smaller institutions or those with limited visa outcome data are often assigned default levels, typically Level 2 or Level 3.

Country Evidence Levels

Each country is also assigned a risk level, determined by historical data on student visa outcomes. Key factors include:

* Visa cancellations and refusals

* Overstaying of visas

* Applications for protection visas after studying

* Visa refusals due to fraudulent documentation (weighted heavily in risk calculations)

Interaction Between Country and Provider Levels

When assessing a student visa application, Home Affairs considers both the country and provider evidence levels:

* Low-risk country + Low-risk provider (Level 1 + Level 1):

* Streamlined process with minimal documentation.

* Mixed levels (e.g., Level 1 provider + Level 3 country):

* Additional documents may be required, such as proof of English proficiency or financial capacity.

* High-risk country + High-risk provider (Level 3 + Level 3):

* Strictest requirements, higher scrutiny, and greater possibility of delays or refusals.

Why Evidence Levels Matter

Students from higher-risk countries may face stricter documentation requirements even when attending well-known institutions. This ensures the integrity of Australia’s international education system while maintaining access for genuine students.

In contrast, applicants from lower-risk countries may experience a smoother and faster process. The system is designed to manage risk effectively, targeting areas with higher instances of visa breaches or overstaying, without restricting genuine students.

Source: BIIC

–Agencies

Tesla’s Australia sales soar in May — a bright spot amid struggles elsewhere

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Wed, 04 Jun 2025 09:12:56 +0000

Electric vehicles outside a Tesla dealership in Melbourne on April 19, 2023.

William West | AFP | Getty Images

Tesla may be facing declining sales in the U.S. and Europe, but it reported a bright spot in Australia — where its electric vehicle sales rebounded to their highest level in nearly 12 months in May.

The American EV maker said Tuesday that its vehicle sales jumped to 3,897, primarily driven by record sales of its recently revamped Model Y compact sport utility vehicle.

Australian sales of the Model Y soared 122.5% year over year, while sales of the company’s Model 3 dropped significantly.

Total deliveries in Australia were up just 9.3% year over year but surged over 675% from April when the company sold only 500 EVs, according to data from the Australian Electric Vehicle Council.

The EV Council is the exclusive source of Tesla and Polestar sales data in Australia after the brands exited the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) last year.

Tesla’s April sales numbers for Australia had been the company’s worst performance of the year there. Despite the May rebound, the EV makers’ total sales in Australia remains down 48.2% year-to-date compared with the same period last year.

“Tesla’s strong sales growth in Australia this May is an encouraging sign, driven almost entirely by strong demand for the updated Model Y. But globally, Tesla is still facing headwinds,” Liz Lee, associate director at technology market research firm Counterpoint Research, told CNBC.

According to Counterpoint EV Sales Tracker, she added, Tesla’s sales were down 13% year on year in the first quarter. “Thus, while the latest Australian rebound is meaningful locally, it does not yet signal a broader global recovery.”

Musk and brand damage

Tesla’s global sales have suffered in recent months in light of increased competition and reputational damage related to CEO Elon Musk’s political rhetoric and activities.

For example, prior to May, Tesla’s Australia sales struggled amid reports of vandalism and protests related to Musk’s work with U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration and support for far-right parties in Europe.

Tesla reported on Tuesday that its sales in the U.S. were down 11% in May from last year. And European industry groups on Monday noted significantly lower sales for new Tesla vehicles in Spain, Portugal, Denmark and Sweden last month.

But there have been some bright spots. Tesla posted a surprise bounce back in Norway, where the Model Y helped it post 213% more vehicles in May from a year ago. Tesla also said it hit a record breaking 1,545 sales in Turkey last month.

That data comes after Trump hosted a press conference last week, where he announced that Elon Musk would be officially departing from his role within the federal government and White House.

Though Trump added that Musk will stay on as an advisor, in a research note following the announcement, Wedbush’s Dan Ives said he believed that Musk’s days in politics are essentially over after the brand damage suffered by Tesla.

The Tesla bull said Musk’s pivot back to the EV maker “was the best possible news Tesla investors could have heard,” with the rollout of its robotaxi launch expected later this month. Musk has said that Tesla has already been testing driverless Model Ys.

Tight competition

Musk’s return comes at a time when Tesla is also facing much tighter competition, especially from Chinese EV makers.

BYD, for example, has been expanding globally in the face of tight competition in its home market of China, and is increasingly going head to head with Tesla.

In April, China’s BYD outsold Tesla in Europe for the first time, according to JATO Dynamics. The automotive giant recently announced a slew of discounts, and other Chinese automakers are following suit. In March, it was revealed that Tesla fell behind BYD in total annual sales revenue.

And according to a report from JATO Dynamics, BYD sold more pure battery EVs in Europe than Tesla for the first time ever last month in what it called a “watershed moment.”

In May, however, Tesla was able to regain a lead against BYD in vehicle sales in Australia, with 3,897 sales compared with BYD’s 3,225, based on available data.

Its worth noting that Tesla exclusively sells battery electric vehicles, while BYD also sells hybrid cars. Battery EVs run entirely on electricity, while hybrid vehicles combine an electric battery with an internal combustion engine.

According to data that Australia’s FCAI sent to CNBC, sales of hybrid vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles — a type of hybrid that can be charged by being plugged into an external power source — rose by about 6% and 118%, respectively, year on year in May.

“Recent sales data indicate that consumers are increasingly turning to hybrid and plug-in hybrids as many Australians want to reduce their vehicle emissions,” said Tony Weber, chief executive of the FCAI.

He added that hybrids come without the range limitations associated with battery EVs, which is a particular concern in Australia.

Amid increasing global competition and threats from hybrid vehicles, Counterpoint’s Lee said, Tesla should continue to look to high-potential regions like India, Southeast Asia and parts of Latin America.

“These markets are ramping up EV infrastructure and incentives, and Tesla could benefit by moving early, especially if it localizes production and tailors offerings to local preferences,” she said.

Tesla announced on Tuesday that it is leasing a warehouse in Mumbai that is expected to be used for vehicle servicing as part of the company’s long-anticipated India expansion.

Tesla was up about 0.5% in trading on Tuesday and is down about 15% year-to-date.

Sony raises PlayStation 5 prices in Europe citing ‘challenging’ economic environment

LSD News Szerkesztőség — Mon, 14 Apr 2025 08:06:58 +0000

The PlayStation DualSense controller and PlayStation 5 console.

Jakub Porzycki | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Sony hiked the price of its flagship PlayStation 5 console in Europe, Australia and New Zealand, citing a “challenging economic environment” behind its move.

In Europe, the PS5 Digital Edition will now cost 499.99 euros ($569.9), Sony said in a blog post on Sunday. That is up from a previous price of 449.99 euros. The company said the U.K. recommended retail price is £429.99, a rise from the previous price of £389.99.

There is no price increase for the PS5 with HD Blu-ray disk drive in Europe and the U.K, while the PS5 Pro, an upgraded model of the console which was launched last year, was also spared hikes.

PS5 prices were also boosted for sales into Australia and New Zealand.

Sony said it has made the “tough decision” to raise prices against the “backdrop of a challenging economic environment, including high inflation and fluctuating exchange rates.”

Global financial and currency markets have been volatile since U.S. President Donald Trump announced so-called “reciprocal tariffs” on more than 180 countries earlier this month. Since then, Trump has reduced some levies to allow time for negotiations and has exempted certain products, like smartphones.

Serkan Toto, CEO of Tokyo-based games consultancy Kantan Games, said its likely Sony will also raise PS5 prices in the U.S.

“I would be very surprised if Sony was able to keep the PlayStation prices in the US stable. Now is the ‘right’ time for the company to hike prices because user backlash would be comparably limited,” Toto told CNBC on Monday.

“So yes, I expect Sony to raise prices in the U.S. eventually, once it’s at least a bit more clear where exactly tariffs are headed.”

It’s not the first time that Sony has boosted prices for the console, which is now more than four years old. It previously undertook hikes in 2022 in various countries and regions, then further lifted the console’s price in Japan last year.