Executive summary

The Australian government has proposed a full ban on social media access for individuals aged 16 and below to address concerns over mental health, online safety, and data privacy stemming from government research. The policy aims to mitigate rising rates of cyberbullying, harmful content exposure, and social media addiction among minors. Enforcement would require stricter age verification measures, potentially through government-issued identification or parental consent systems. Critics argue that the ban may infringe on digital rights, prove difficult to enforce, and push young users toward unregulated platforms. "Effective implementation requires balancing youth protection with accessibility, privacy concerns, and technological feasibility."

‍

History

On November 26, 2024, Australia’s House of Representatives passed a significant bill, known as the ‘Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024’. This bill was passed with a vote of 102 to 13 and by November 28, the Australian Senate approved the bill with a vote of 34 to 19 and subsequently finalized the bill’s passage through Parliament.  The bill was officially enacted into law the next day.

The legislation, which had broad political support, specifically targets “age-restricted social media platforms” such as TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, X (previously known as ‘Twitter’), and Facebook. The legislation mandates that these and other similar social media platforms, implement ‘reasonable measures’ for age verification through biometrics. While the legislation does not explicitly define what constitutes ‘reasonable measures’ for age verification, the explanatory memorandum states that the platforms are expected to implement some form of age assurance methodology, with the effectiveness of these measures being evaluated based on several factors, including available verification methods, implementation costs, and data privacy implications.

 Experts suggest that Government-issued identification material or an accredited service under the Digital ID Act 2024, such as Australia’s MyID, may be used if those means are considered reasonable and alternative means for age assurance are available to users.

Within a year’s time, companies that fail to prevent minors from creating accounts and accessing their social media platform could face fines of up to $50 million AUD. The same penalty applies to platforms that fail to destroy data collected during the age verification process.

‍Background

In response to the passing of the bill, digital researchers and experts have shared that Australia’s social media ban is "too blunt an instrument" to effectively address the associated risks (anxiety, depression, cyberbullying, privacy) of social media usage. They advised against its implementation due to how the restrictions may be circumvented through a  VPN services, which mask users’ locations and allow them to bypass regional restrictions. They also made serious mention of the danger of pushing children to enter less regulated corners of the internet. 

TikTok, an immensely popular platform with around 1 billion active users, also responded to the passing of this bill by questioning the definition of a social media platform, citing that it was “too broad and unclear” and that “almost everyone online service could fall within [it]”. Other platforms, namely Google and Snap, have also criticized the legislation for not providing more detail about the pragmatic implications of this bill (verification, preventative measures, etc).

X, previously known as Twitter,  has also questioned the “lawfulness” of this bill, stating that it may not be compatible with international regulations and human treaties which Australia has signed regarding freedom of speech.

Australian youth advocates, such as the eSafety Youth Council, have expressed concern over the bill, stating that the government does not fully understand the role social media plays in their lives, and accused the government of locking them out of the debate. Meta also criticized the legislation for its seemingly ineffective solution along with the short legislative process that “rushed the legislation through while failing to properly consider the evidence” and ignored the “voices of young Australians”.

Policy Problem

  Australia’s social media ban for users under 16 was driven by growing concerns over the negative effects of social media on young people’s mental health. Lawmakers pointed to rising cases of cyberbullying, exposure to harmful content, and the addictive nature of platforms such as TikTok and Instagram as reasons for stricter regulations. Reports from child safety advocates and mental health experts highlighted that social media was contributing to increased anxiety, depression, and poor self-esteem amongst teenagers. Additionally, the government criticized tech companies for not doing enough to protect young users, leading to calls for stronger enforcement and accountability. In response to public pressure and studies raising concerns about the dangers of social media for youth, Australia passed the ban to limit children’s access and encourage a safer online environment. 

After the ban was passed, social media companies were forced to develop stricter age verification measures, and some began requiring government-issued IDs or AI-powered age detection. Many teenagers who relied on social media for entertainment, communication, and even education had to find alternate platforms or stop using them entirely. Parents and schools reported a mix of reactions, with some praising the law for reducing screen time and improving mental wellbeing, while others worried about its impact on digital literacy. This ban also sparked debates on personal freedom, as critics argued that restricting access to social media could limit teenagers’ ability to engage with current events and connect with peers. Meanwhile, other countries have started considering similar laws, closely watching how Australia’s decision plays out in the long run. 

However, the ban has also led to several unintended consequences, raising concerns about how effective it truly is. Many teenagers have found ways to bypass age restrictions using VPNs, fake birthdays, or accounts created by older friends and family members, Moreover, the reliance on age verification has sparked privacy concerns, as requiring official identification to use social media raises questions about data security and surveillance. Some experts fear that cutting teenagers from social media could limit their access to important mental health resources and support groups that exist on these platforms. If the ban continues to face backlash and enforcement challenges, Australia may need to reconsider its approach to adjust the law to address these complications. 

Policy Options

 Given social media’s deep integration into Australian teen culture, the key question now is how effective this legislation will be. Already, many other countries have failed with their social media bans. Take Norway, for example. Norway passed legislation in 2018 limiting social media access for children under 13 through age verification services. However, it is widely acknowledged within Norway that the policy has been ineffective. In a survey by the Norwegian Media Authority, it was estimated last August that 53% of 9-year-olds, 58% of 10-year-olds, and 72% of 11-year-olds all still use social media even after the ban. Other countries like France, Germany, and Belgium also have similar age verification and parental consent mechanisms, again, only to be unproductive. By analyzing the successes and failures of these countries, Australia can refine its approach. The following policy amendments could strengthen the effectiveness of the social media ban.

1. Moderation and Collaboration with Parents. Because a lot of public support for social media bans on kids has come from parents themselves, a solution could be furthering parental consent through better policy, investment, and research. Many countries and international blocs like the EU have already passed parental consent, which is needed to process minors on social media platforms, but they have not worked through the minimal steps and public knowledge on what they should be doing. Many other parents have also pushed back that they need certain social media services like texting, which they have to concede and ultimately let their children use platforms. One potential compromise is improving social media platforms to retrain essential communication tools, such as texting and calls, while also integrating user-friendly parental controls. Additionally, public education campaigns can inform parents about their rights and responsibilities in monitoring their children’s digital activity. 
2. Another potential solution is advocating for stronger international regulations on social media access for minors.Because a lot of minors use social media for others around their age, global action would be more productive in making change. Just as France passed its national bill for users under 15 to be prevented from using social media, it also pitched to the EU to come up with a bloc-wide solution. Australia can do the same by contributing to global legislation that can back up its policy and set global cultural standards on social media moderation. 
3. Corporate Changes. Now with the increased power of AI and age verification systems, Australia could also collaborate with popular social media platforms in advancing the technology around age verification to keep those under 16 off. With new technology of document, selfie, and AI checks now more readily available, ​​Australia and their social media companies should think of how these newer mechanisms can better verify minor age and accessibility. 

   With social media’s growing popularity among young people, governments must take stronger action to ensure their safety. Given the challenges in enforcing existing bans, these policy amendments can help create a safer and more constructive social media environment.

Conclusions

Australia’s social media ban for minors under 16 aims to address serious concerns about mental health and online safety. The success of this policy will depend on effective enforcement and its ability to adapt to real-world challenges. The shortcomings of similar bans in other countries suggest that Australia must take additional steps to ensure its policy effectiveness. One crucial step is improving parental involvement by creating clearer parental controls (age friendly interface) and educational campaigns that inform families about how to moderate and guide their children's online presence. Additionally, international collaboration on this ban could encourage universal standards to prevent young users from bypassing restrictions through foreign platforms. 

Social media companies must also play a role in refining age verification processes, using advanced AI and biometric verification while maintaining data privacy (harvesting data from faces and IDs). If bans don’t play out the way Australia intended, policymakers may want to consider alternative strategies such as mandatory digital literacy which would equip teenagers with the skills to navigate online spaces responsibly. These spaces could be implemented into schools, posted on YouTube or other social media, and even hosted by government officials. 

Ultimately, while the ban reflects the government's commitment to youth protection, it is not a perfect solution. Striking a balance between safety, accessibility, and personal freedoms will require ongoing policy adjustments. By working with parents, tech companies, and international partners, Australia can create a more comprehensive and sustainable approach to regulating social media use among young people. A collaborative effort will be essential in ensuring that online spaces remain safe while preserving digital rights.

Acknowledgment

The Institute for Youth in Policy wishes to acknowledge Anagha Nagesh, Megha Madgula, and other contributors for developing and maintaining the Policy Department within the Institute.

References

1. Belot, Henry. 2024. “Meta accuses Australian government of failing to consider young people's voices with world-first social media ban.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/29/meta-australia-social-media-ban-response.
2. Ehmke, Rachel. “How Using Social Media Affects Teenagers.” Child Mind Institute, November 18, 2024. https://childmind.org/article/how-using-social-media-affects-teenagers.
3. Goitom, Hanibal. 2024. Australia: Social Media Banned for Children Under 16. Web Page. https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2024-12-08/australia-social-media-banned-for-children-under-16/.
4. Haeck, Pieter. 2024. “France doubles down on age minimum of 15 for social media use.” POLITICO.eu. https://www.politico.eu/article/france-doubles-down-on-social-media-age-limit-at-15/.
5. Kee, Daisy Mui Hung, Maryam Ammar Lutf Al‐Anesi, and Sarah Ammar Lutf Al‐Anesi. “Cyberbullying on Social Media Under the Influence of COVID‐19.” Global Business and Organizational Excellence 41, no. 6 (July 6, 2022): 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22175.
6. MCGUIRK, ROD. 2024. “Australia's House of Representatives passes bill that would ban children from social media.” AP News. https://apnews.com/article/australia-social-media-young-children-bf0ca2aedaf61b71fe335421240e94c4.
7. MCGUIRK, ROD. 2024. “Australia's plan to ban children from social media proves popular and problematic.” AP News. https://apnews.com/article/australia-social-media-ban-children-1abadf5445418c8c14f5f68cf76b38d0.
8. “Norway Plans to Ban Social Media for Kids Under 15 but It May Backfire.” 2024. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/norway-ban-social-media-kids-under-15-backfire-2024-10.
9. Sakasegawa, Jeff. 2024. “The State of Age Verification in Social Media.” Persona. https://withpersona.com/blog/age-verification-in-social-media?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
10. Singer, Ilana. 2024. “Australia to enforce a social media ban for children: Will it achieve its goals?” IAPP. https://iapp.org/news/a/australia-to-enforce-a-social-media-ban-for-children-will-it-achieve-its-goals-.
11. Sakasegawa, Jeff. 2024. “The State of Age Verification in Social Media.” Persona. https://withpersona.com/blog/age-verification-in-social-media?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
12. The Associated Press. 2024. “Social media ban for children under 16 in Australia becomes law.” NPR. https://www.npr.org/2024/11/28/g-s1-36142/australia-social-media-ban-children.
13. Turnbull, Tiffanie. 2024. “Australian social media ban on under-16s approved by parliament.” BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c89vjj0lxx9o.
14. “What countries do to regulate children's social media access.” 2024. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/technology/what-countries-do-regulate-childrens-social-media-access-2024-11-28/.