Digital age of consent wasn't 'inappropriate'

“Inappropriate” was the word used by critics to describe the Government’s proposal to set the age of digital consent at 13 years.

We disagree. It wasn’t inappropriate. That is a weasel word that simply doesn’t cut it.

The 13-year proposal — unfortunately allowable under the rules of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) — was the harebrained work of ministers and advisers, who appear, even now, to be unwilling or unable to understand that unregulated social media publishers can inflict havoc on teenagers barely out of primary school … and on their parents.

The defeat in the Dáil of the 13-years proposition sets Ireland’s digital age of consent at 16.

Many parents might fear that is still too low and ask why the voting age — 18 — was not considered.

If it’s believed, quite rightly, that youngsters are not sufficiently mature and informed to be able to vote at 16, why, at that age, should they be free to give the go-ahead to social — and antisocial — media platforms and companies to process their personal data for commercial gain?

But, along with France, Germany and the Netherlands, 16 it is, and it’s a significant improvement on what Fine Gael ministers were proposing, but never quite got around to advocating adequately.

Pro-13 supporters argued that children had a right to a “voice” and “participation” — whatever those banalities might mean — online, yet failed to explain why that included having to give their personal data to anyone with ill-intent, and commercial gain, in mind to run through their algorithm mills.

Rejoicing, however, at the Dáil’s vote for common sense need not be euphoric.

The GDPR is not the last word in data protection, for children and adults.

It’s too little, too late, with loopholes around age verification, through which social media companies will slide effortlessly.