Australia's bold move to ban under-16s from social media platforms has finally come into effect, and it appears to have been a largely successful launch. On Wednesday, the law, which was passed last year, kicked in, restricting access to popular platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube for minors under the age of 16.
The Australian government had high hopes for this move, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese saying it was "world-leading" and that Australia is showing enough is enough. The country's under-16s social media ban has indeed turned heads globally, with several countries announcing plans to follow suit. Malaysia, Indonesia, Denmark, Norway, and others have all expressed interest in implementing similar measures.
However, despite its popularity among Australians, who overwhelmingly supported the ban in a recent vote, the real test for this law will be in the years ahead. How effective is it in reducing harm from social media use? Will it make a tangible difference in improving mental health outcomes for teenagers?
While some tech companies were initially opposed to the ban, all major platforms have since agreed to comply. Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok used signals such as account registration dates to wave through many users. Others, like Reddit, have opted to enforce age restrictions, albeit with a challenge from high court on Friday.
The Australian government's efforts to sell the policy to the world were not lacking. A reported $100,000 was spent by the government on sending the minister responsible, Anika Wells, to the United Nations in September. The momentum for this ban was further amplified by a News Corp campaign titled "Let Them Be Kids", which was described as one of the most powerful uses of print media.
The online safety regulator will be tracking data to monitor the impact on mental health and school test scores, with reviews scheduled for 2027. However, concerns are already being raised about the potential impact of this ban, particularly in rural areas where many young people lack access to high-speed internet.
As one Guardian reader pointed out, "there are young people out there, isolated both physically and literally, living in small towns or regional communities, who potentially will miss out on online support." Wayne Holdsworth, a Melbourne father who campaigned for the law after his son took his life after being bullied online, acknowledged that while this ban was an important step forward, education would be key to helping teens handle social media from 16.
While Australia's under-16s social media ban may have been seen as a bold move initially, it remains to be seen whether it will prove effective in reducing the harm caused by excessive social media use among teenagers.
The Australian government had high hopes for this move, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese saying it was "world-leading" and that Australia is showing enough is enough. The country's under-16s social media ban has indeed turned heads globally, with several countries announcing plans to follow suit. Malaysia, Indonesia, Denmark, Norway, and others have all expressed interest in implementing similar measures.
However, despite its popularity among Australians, who overwhelmingly supported the ban in a recent vote, the real test for this law will be in the years ahead. How effective is it in reducing harm from social media use? Will it make a tangible difference in improving mental health outcomes for teenagers?
While some tech companies were initially opposed to the ban, all major platforms have since agreed to comply. Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok used signals such as account registration dates to wave through many users. Others, like Reddit, have opted to enforce age restrictions, albeit with a challenge from high court on Friday.
The Australian government's efforts to sell the policy to the world were not lacking. A reported $100,000 was spent by the government on sending the minister responsible, Anika Wells, to the United Nations in September. The momentum for this ban was further amplified by a News Corp campaign titled "Let Them Be Kids", which was described as one of the most powerful uses of print media.
The online safety regulator will be tracking data to monitor the impact on mental health and school test scores, with reviews scheduled for 2027. However, concerns are already being raised about the potential impact of this ban, particularly in rural areas where many young people lack access to high-speed internet.
As one Guardian reader pointed out, "there are young people out there, isolated both physically and literally, living in small towns or regional communities, who potentially will miss out on online support." Wayne Holdsworth, a Melbourne father who campaigned for the law after his son took his life after being bullied online, acknowledged that while this ban was an important step forward, education would be key to helping teens handle social media from 16.
While Australia's under-16s social media ban may have been seen as a bold move initially, it remains to be seen whether it will prove effective in reducing the harm caused by excessive social media use among teenagers.
I mean, I get what they're trying to do - reduce harm from social media use and all that... but restricting access for under-16s? That's just so harsh 
What about their online safety? They'll still be on social media, just not on the ones you've specifically banned 
. And what about rural kids who can't even get a decent internet connection? That's like throwing them out of a boat without life jackets 
. I'm all for education and help with social media use, but this law feels like a band-aid solution at best 
I'm not sure about this new law being implemented in Australia... I mean, banning under-16s from social media platforms might seem like a good idea at first, but what about the potential impact on rural areas where internet access is limited? 
Some young people out there rely on social media to stay connected and get support. We need to think carefully about how this law will actually work in practice and whether it's the best solution for mental health concerns. 
Maybe education and guidance should be part of the plan instead of just taking away access altogether? 
like they just wanted something to talk about, and now they're trying to sell it to the whole world. still, gotta give 'em credit for trying, right? maybe they'll actually make a difference in the long run 
it's like saying "don't touch the stove" but not providing any alternatives for them to explore when they're curious. we gotta think about what kind of digital literacy we want kids to have, and how that's gonna shape who they are as adults... 
I think education is key here, as that Melbourne dad said – teaching teens how to use social media safely and responsibly from a young age would've been way more effective than banning 'em altogether. Still, gotta give props to Australia for taking a stand and showing the world what they're made of 
this ban is defo a step in right direction 
but is it enough tho? 
online in rural areas 
where wifi is scarce 
and young ppl mightnt even have access to these platforms 
in the 1st place 
its good 2 see australia takin lead on this 
and other countries follow suit 
but its gonna b interesting 2 see how it plays out in practice 
. Like, I get where Australia's coming from - they've seen the negative effects of social media on mental health and want to protect their kids 
. But, what about those rural areas that lack high-speed internet? Those young people are gonna be stuck in the dark ages 
.
, but what about the potential consequences? Are we gonna see a rise in online harassment or cyberbullying since they'll be forced underground 
? We need to keep an eye on that 
.
. Will it make a tangible difference in improving mental health outcomes for teenagers? Only time (and data) will tell 
.
i can feel u worryin about this new law 
but ur right, theres a lot 2 consider here... like, how wll it affect rural areas where alot of young ppl dont have access 2 fast internet 
& whats about teenagers who r already strugglin mentally? will this law help them or just stigmatize them even more? 
its like they're saying "enough is enough" to all the drama and toxic vibes on social media. but at the same time, im worried about the potential impact on rural areas where internet access might be limited 
those kids need to be able to talk to each other online just as much as city kids do. anyway, i hope this ban will actually help with mental health and reduce cyberbullying 
Just kidding, sorta. But seriously, have you considered that banning social media for under-16s might be more of a Band-Aid solution than addressing the root issues? It feels like we're just treating the symptoms instead of getting to the heart of the problem – kids' mental health, online safety, and all that jazz.
.
.
. But maybe the government can use this as an opportunity to look at ways to bridge that gap and make sure everyone has equal access to online safety resources.
but we gotta wait and see how this plays out in the long run... 2027 reviews cant come soon enuf 
. We need to make sure we're not just taking away their screens without providing alternative solutions or support. It's like, we should be teaching teens how to use social media responsibly, not just locking them out of it 
.