Australia’s Proposed Social Media Ban for Under 16s: A Practical Guide

The Australian government is poised to mandate that social media companies implement “reasonable steps” to prevent children under the age of 16 from creating accounts, effective December 10. Existing accounts held by minors will also be subject to deactivation or deletion under the new rules.

Hailed by the government as a world-first policy garnering widespread support from parents, this ban aims to significantly reduce the “pressure and risks” faced by children on social media platforms. These risks, according to an Australian government statement, stem from “design features that encourage children to spend more time on screen, while presenting content that can harm their health and well-being.”

A government-commissioned study earlier this year revealed a concerning trend: 96% of Australian children aged 10-15 utilize social media. Even more alarming, seven out of ten of these young users are exposed to harmful content and behaviors, ranging from misogynistic material and fight videos to content promoting eating disorders and self-harm. Furthermore, one in seven children reported experiencing suspected grooming behavior from adults or older children, and over half disclosed being victims of cyberbullying.

What Platforms Are Affected?

Initially, the Australian government has identified 10 platforms subject to the ban: Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, and streaming platforms Kick and Twitch. However, there have been growing calls to extend this prohibition to online gaming platforms as well. In anticipation of the ban, platforms like Roblox and Discord have proactively begun implementing age verification checks for some of their features, seeking to preempt potential government action.

The Australian government has indicated it will continuously review the list of affected platforms, guided by three primary criteria. The first criterion is that the platform’s main or “significant purpose” must be to facilitate online social interaction between two or more users. The second requires the platform to enable users to interact with some or all other users. Lastly, the third criterion stipulates that the platform must allow users to upload material. Notably, YouTube Kids, Google Classroom, and WhatsApp are exempt from the ban, as they are deemed not to meet these specified criteria. Children will still be able to view most content on platforms like YouTube without needing to create an account.

How Will the Ban Be Enforced?

Crucially, children and parents will not face penalties for violating this ban. Instead, the Australian government places the onus of enforcement squarely on social media companies, which could face fines of up to US$32 million (approximately A$49 million or IDR 534.6 billion) for serious or repeated breaches. The government insists these companies must take “reasonable steps” to keep children off their platforms, including implementing age verification technology, though specific data usage methods have not been fully detailed.

Several potential verification methods have been mooted, including government-issued identification cards, facial or voice recognition, and “age inference.” The latter method involves estimating a person’s age using online information beyond their birth date, such as their online behavior or interactions.

The government actively encourages social media platforms to adopt a combination of these methods. It has also unequivocally stated that platforms are not permitted to rely on users to self-declare their age or on parents to merely confirm their child’s age. In a proactive move, Meta—the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads—announced it would begin closing teen accounts from December 4. Meta clarified that adults whose accounts are affected by closure can verify their age using government-issued ID or by submitting a video selfie. Other impacted platforms have yet to disclose their compliance strategies.

Will These Rules Be Effective?

Without a clear understanding of the specific methods social media companies intend to employ, the true effectiveness of this ban remains uncertain. Several concerns have already emerged. There are fears that age verification technology could inadvertently block legitimate users while failing to deter children who falsify their ages. Government reports, for instance, indicate that facial scanning technology is often least accurate for the very age groups targeted by this legislation.

Questions also persist regarding the sufficiency of the penalty. Stephen Scheeler, a former Facebook executive, highlighted to Australian news agencies that Meta could generate US$50 million (approximately A$77 million or IDR 835 billion)—exceeding the maximum fine—in roughly an hour and 52 minutes. Critics argue that even with stringent enforcement, the ban’s impact on children’s online safety might be limited, given that dating sites and gaming platforms are not covered by the regulations. AI chatbots, which have recently drawn scrutiny for allegedly encouraging self-harm in children or engaging in “sensual” conversations with minors, are also excluded. Furthermore, there’s a significant worry that teenagers who rely on social media for community and connection could become further isolated. Many contend that educating children on safe social media navigation is a more pragmatic approach than outright blocking access.

Australian Communications Minister Annika Wells has conceded that the ban may not be “perfect.” Speaking in early November, she stated, “The process will look a little messy… Big reforms always are.”

Are There Data Protection Concerns?

Another significant criticism revolves around the necessity of collecting and storing vast amounts of personal data for age verification. The risk of data breaches and misuse is a major concern, particularly given Australia’s history of large-scale data theft incidents in recent years. However, the government insists that the new rules incorporate “strong protections” for personal data. The regulations stipulate that collected information cannot be used for any purpose other than age verification and must be destroyed once the process is complete. The government has also promised to impose “serious penalties” for any violations. Additionally, platforms are required to provide age verification options that do not rely solely on government identification, offering users safer choices.

How Have Social Media Companies Responded?

Several social media companies expressed surprise when the Australian government announced the ban in November 2024. They argued that the rules would be difficult to implement, easily circumvented, time-consuming for users, and would pose risks to privacy. Moreover, they contended that the policy could drive children towards the “dark corners of the internet” and deprive teenagers of vital spaces for social interaction. Snap, the company behind Snapchat, and YouTube even disputed being classified as social media companies. Google, YouTube’s parent company, is reportedly considering legal action regarding its platform’s inclusion on the list, though the BBC’s attempts to confirm this with Google went unanswered.

Despite announcing earlier implementation, Meta maintains that the ban will lead to teenagers facing “inconsistent protection across the various apps they use.” During a parliamentary hearing in October, TikTok and Snap stated their continued opposition to the rules but confirmed they would nevertheless implement them. Kick, the only Australian company on the list, declared it would introduce “a number of steps” and continue to communicate “constructively” with authorities.

Do Other Countries Have Similar Rules?

While Australia’s ban on social media use for children under 16 is a global first, numerous other countries are expected to closely observe its implementation. Various approaches have been attempted worldwide to limit screen time, restrict social media access for children, and prevent exposure to harmful content. However, none have yet imposed a total ban on these platforms.

In the UK, online safety rules enacted last July threaten online companies with substantial fines and even imprisonment for executives if they fail to implement measures to protect children from illegal and harmful content. Several European countries permit social media use below a certain age, but only with parental consent. In September, a French parliamentary inquiry recommended a social media ban for children under 15, along with a “social media curfew” for users aged 15 to 18. Denmark has announced plans to ban social media for children under 15, while Norway is considering a similar proposal. The Spanish government has also submitted a draft bill to parliament that would require guardian consent for children under 16 to access social media platforms. Conversely, in the United States, an attempt by Utah to ban teenagers under 18 from using social media without parental consent was blocked by a federal judge last year, hitting a roadblock.

Will Children Try to Circumvent the Ban?

Teenagers interviewed by the BBC admitted to already creating new accounts with false ages in anticipation of the rules coming into force—despite government warnings to social media companies that they are expected to detect and remove such accounts. Online, teenagers are also actively sharing recommendations for alternative apps and strategies to bypass the ban. Some adolescents, including influencers, are transitioning to shared accounts with their parents. Meanwhile, observers predict a surge in the use of VPNs—technology that conceals a user’s location—a phenomenon previously witnessed in the UK following the implementation of age control regulations.