Australia is preparing to enforce the world’s first nationwide ban preventing children under 16 from having social media accounts. Beginning December 10, social media companies must take what the government calls reasonable steps to ensure underage users cannot set up accounts and that existing accounts held by Australian children under 16 are deactivated or removed. Ten platforms are currently covered: Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, Kick and Twitch. Companies that fail to comply can be fined up to 49.5 million Australian dollars. Meta has already begun telling teens to download their data and delete their accounts, while Snapchat has launched age verification features. Other platforms are still deciding how to comply, and the list may grow over time.
The government says the ban is a response to rising concerns about online harm. A large study found that 96 percent of children ages 10 to 15 use social media, and seven out of ten reported exposure to harmful content, including misogynistic posts, fight videos and material promoting eating disorders and suicide. More than half said they had been cyberbullied, and one in seven reported grooming behavior from adults or older children. Officials say the ban is aimed at reducing the pressures and risks children face because of platform design features that pull them into constant screen time while feeding them content that can damage their health and wellbeing. Communications Minister Anika Wells said, “We will not be intimidated by legal challenges. We will not be intimidated by Big Tech. On behalf of Australian parents, we stand firm.”
How Social Media Can Be Dangerous for Children
The government and many advocates warn that social media can expose children to harmful content, cyberbullying and grooming. It can push them toward unhealthy comparisons, risky behavior and feelings of isolation. Algorithms can promote extreme or harmful material. Children may also face scams, harassment and sexual exploitation. Studies show that many teens report negative mental health effects from frequent use. Several platforms face lawsuits in the United States over accusations that their systems contribute to a mental health crisis among young people.
The responsibility falls on companies, not children or parents. Platforms must verify users’ ages through methods such as government ID checks, bank-linked verification, face or voice recognition and age inference models that estimate age based on behavior or images. Meta says teens who are removed incorrectly can use a video selfie or government ID to restore access. Snapchat will allow verification through ConnectID, which uses bank information, or through k-ID, which allows users to upload government IDs or photos. Critics worry that large amounts of personal information will be collected, but the government says these data must be destroyed after use and cannot be used for other purposes.
Opponents warn that the ban may be ineffective and could harm young people. Some say children will simply create fake accounts, use VPNs or turn to platforms not covered by the ban. Teens online are already sharing tips on how to avoid detection. Youth advocates argue the ban will isolate teens who rely on social media for community and information. UNICEF Australia says social media has positive benefits and that improving platform safety would be more effective. Critics also note that many sources of online harm remain untouched, including gaming platforms, dating sites and AI chatbots. Some argue that the fines are too small to deter large companies and that enforcement tools like facial assessment are unreliable for the very age group they would target.
Some parents and civil liberties advocates oppose the ban for different reasons. John Ruddick of the Digital Freedom Project called it a violation of rights and argued that parents should supervise online activity, not the government. He said, “We do not want to outsource that responsibility to government and unelected bureaucrats.” He also said the ban restricts freedom of political communication for young people.
The Court Challenge and the Issues at Stake
The Digital Freedom Project has launched a constitutional challenge in Australia’s High Court on behalf of two 15 year olds. The group argues that the ban violates protected political communication and limits young people’s access to information. It has not yet decided whether to request an injunction to block the ban before December 10. Critics of the lawsuit say the government has a duty to reduce online harm and that tech companies have failed to regulate themselves. Supporters of the lawsuit believe government overreach is a greater threat and say the ban interferes with parental authority. Some companies, including Google, may consider their own legal challenges.
Countries around the world are closely watching Australia’s approach. Malaysia has already announced a similar ban beginning in 2026. New Zealand, Indonesia, France, Spain, Denmark and Greece are exploring age restriction policies. Many governments cite the need to protect children from cyberbullying, scams and sexual exploitation. Australia’s government acknowledges the rollout may not be perfect. Minister Wells said earlier that major reforms can look messy at first but insisted the effort is necessary. Whether the ban improves online safety or creates new problems will depend on enforcement, court rulings and how teens adapt. The debate over safety, privacy and freedom is far from over, and the world is watching to see how Australia’s experiment unfolds.
