I. Executive Summary

The Australian government has proposed a full ban on social media access for individuals under the age of 17 in order to address concerns over mental health, online safety, and data privacy. 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, such as government-issued ID or verified parental consent. Critics argue that the ban may infringe on digital rights, prove difficult to enforce, and push young users toward unregulated platforms.

II. History

On November 26, 2024, with a vote of 102 to 13, Australia’s House of Representatives passed the ‘Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024’. Just two days later, the Australian Senate approved the bill, thereby passing it into law.  

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. It mandates that these 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. The effectiveness of these measures is to be 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 are considered reasonable and alternative means for age assurance.

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

III. Background

In response to the passing of the bill, digital researchers and experts have shared concerns 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 VPN services, which mask users’ locations and allow them to bypass regional restrictions. Critics also emphasized the danger of pushing children to enter less regulated corners of the internet. 

TikTok, a platform with around 1 billion active users, 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 Snapchat, have criticized the legislation for not providing more detail about the pragmatic implications of this bill (verification, preventative measures, etc).

X questioned the “lawfulness” of this bill, stating that it may not be compatible with international regulations and human treaties 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”. 

IV. 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, with some requiring government-issued IDs or AI-powered age detection. Many teenagers who relied on social media for entertainment, communication, and  education had to find alternate platforms or stop using them entirely. Parents and schools reported mixed results, 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 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 off 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 the ban.

V. Policy Options

Given social media’s deep integration into Australian teen culture, the key question now is how effective this legislation will be. Several other countries have tried to implement similar social media bans, yet failed to do so.  Norway, for example, passed legislation in 2018 limiting social media access for children under 13. However, it is widely acknowledged that the policy has been ineffective. In a 2024 survey conducted by the Norwegian Media Authority, it was estimated 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. Countries like France, Germany, and Belgium also have  age verification and parental consent mechanisms, yet they are largely 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.

Moderation and Collaboration with Parents. A substantial amount of public support for this he social media bans has come from parents, indicating that an effective solution could be furthering parental consent in some capacity. Many countries and international blocs have already passed parental consent legislation, which is necessary to process minors on social media platforms, but they have not worked to expand this imitiative. Other parents have asserted that certain social media services, primarily those involved in communication, are necessary for their children. A potential compromise is improving social media platforms to retain essential features, such as texting and calling, 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. 

Another potential solution is advocating for stronger international regulations on social media access for minors. Considering the substantial amount of youth that are active on these platforms, global action would be more productive in creating change. Just as France passed its national bill for users under 15 to be prevented from using social media, it also urged the EU to come up with a bloc-wide solution. Australia can do the same by contributing to global legislation that would back up its policy and set global standards on social media moderation. 

Corporate Changes. With the increased power of AI and age verification systems, Australia should look to collaborate with popular social media platforms in advancing the technology around age verification. AI checks, although never implemented on such a grand scale, are more readily available than ever. A bond between the public and private sectors to develop this technology could prove beneficial for all parties involved. 

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.

VI. Conclusion

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 its effective enforcement and 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 such example is improving parental involvement by creating clearer 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, potentially incorporating advanced AI and biometric verification while upholding data privacy regulations. If the ban does not play out the way Australia intends, policymakers may want to consider digital literacy initiatives that would help teenagers navigate online spaces responsibly. These programs could be introduced in schools, posted on YouTube, or 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.

‍

References

Banerji, Olina. 2024. “Why Schools Need to Wake Up to the Threat of AI ‘Deepfakes’ and Bullying.” EducationWeek. https://www.edweek.org/technology/why-schools-need-to-wake-up-to-the-threat-of-ai-deepfakes-and-bullying/2024/12.

Lee, Hosu. 2024. “South Korea: The deepfake crisis engulfing hundreds of schools.” BBC, September 2, 2024. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpdlpj9zn9go.

McNicholas, Tim. 2023. “New Jersey high school students accused of making AI-generated pornographic images of classmates.” CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/westfield-high-school-ai-pornographic-images-students/

Payne, Laura. 2025. “Deepfake | History & Facts.” Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/technology/deepfake.

proofpoint. n.d. “Deepfake Technology.” What Is a Deepfake? Definition & Technology. https://www.proofpoint.com/us/threat-reference/deepfake.

Regan, Gabe. 2024. “A Brief History of Deep Fakes — Reality Defender.” Reality Defender. https://www.realitydefender.com/insights/history-of-deepfakes.

Spring, Marianna. 2024. “The AI clip that convinced - and divided - a Baltimore suburb.” BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg9k5dv1zdo.

Winnard, Nigel. 2024. “The Rise of Deepfakes in Schools.” The International Educator. https://www.tieonline.com/article/3632/the-rise-of-deepfakes-in-schools.

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.

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.

Goitom, Hanibal. Australia: Social Media Banned for Children Under 16. 2024. Web Page. https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2024-12-08/australia-social-media-banned-for-children-under-16/.

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.

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-

Turnbull, Tiffanie. 2024. “Australian social media ban on under-16s approved by parliament.” BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c89vjj0lxx9o.

Banerji, Olina. “Why Schools Need to Wake Up to the Threat of AI ‘Deepfakes’ and Bullying.” Education Week. December 2024. https://www.edweek.org/technology/why-schools-need-to-wake-up-to-the-threat-of-ai-deepfakes-and-bullying/2024/12.

Petrie-Norris, Cottie. “Bill to Protect Children from AI-Enabled Sexual Exploitation Passes Assembly.” California State Assembly. May 23, 2024. https://a23.asmdc.org/press-releases/20240523-bill-protect-children-ai-enabled-sexual-exploitation-passes-assembly.

Spring, Marianna. “The AI Clip That Convinced—and Divided—a Baltimore Suburb.” BBC News. 2024. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg9k5dv1zdo.

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/.

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.

“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.

Sakasegawa, Jeff. 2024. “The State of Age Verification in Social Media.” Persona. https://withpersona.com/blog/age-verification-in-social-media.

“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/.