Opinion: Australia Is Banning Social Media For Children Under 16, Is That A Good Idea?

The Australian government is working on a new law to ban social media platforms for children under 16 years old, whether the parents agree or not. The radical measure, proposed by the Australian prime minister Anthony Albanese as a “world-leading” initiative has raised concerns and triggered a heated global debate on the topic.

The details of the measure and its implications are still in the making; the law is expected to be effective by the end of next year. What we do know is that there will be sanctions for the companies that do not comply with the measure, that it will be mandatory for everyone, and that the Australian government will develop an age verification system.

Many praise Albanese’s firm posture and believe that children are indeed at risk and that it is ultimately the government’s duty to ensure safety and implement changes to do something about it now.

Others find the measure absurd and share “conspiracy theories” about surveillance and control tied to the possibly required digital IDs for age verification. Several experts and concerned civilians have reached the same conclusion: this is not the solution.

But what is the “right way”? Here’s what’s at stake.

Children’s Mental Health and Safety: An Urgent Priority

We can likely all agree with Albanese’s main point: the addictive nature of social media for children (and adults), along with the risks it has to young users during critical stages of development, is concerning. We must do something about it.

Experts and doctors have called the current mental health situation among adolescents an emergency. Many have been urging authorities and governments to take action for years.

“Social media is doing harm to our kids, and I’m calling time on it,” said the Australian Prime Minister at a conference last week. Albanese is answering the call, he is taking action.

But, is this the right path? There are mixed feelings.

All those opposed, raise your hand

Over 140 Australian and international academics shared an open letter to warn Albanese and his cabinet about his measure.

“The online world is a place where children and young people access information, build social and technical skills, connect with family and friends, learn about the world around them, and relax and play,” states the document signed by organizations like the Australian Child Rights Task Force, and professors from prominent universities. “Any restrictions in the digital world must therefore be designed with care and we are concerned that a ‘ban’ is too blunt an instrument to address risks effectively.”

The risks of isolation, especially for teenagers from minority groups, are a growing concern among experts. In Australia, 97% of teenagers use social media and rely on it to connect with others. But the children are not the only concern.

Other citizens fear Albanese’s measure to be a social control strategy or a decision that will put Australians’ identities and private information at risk. While many call these conspiracy theories, others, including senators like Greens senator David Shoebridge might call them very valid concerns.

“If there’s going to be an age verification, everyone has to go through age verification,” said Shoebridge during a Senate Comitée a few days ago to address digital ID concerns. “This is literally everybody accessing social media, that’s how it has to work, isn’t it?”

All those in favor, raise your hand

Besides the opposition Liberal Party, ministers, and other politicians, parents seem to be the main supporters — especially those whose children have been through harassment, bullying, addiction, extortion, and worse.

Sonya Ryan, a cyber safety campaigner, thinks differently. She has sadly experienced the risks firsthand: her 15-year-old daughter was murdered in 2007 by a 50-year-old pedophile who pretended to be a teenager online.

“Kids are being exposed to harmful pornography, they’re being fed misinformation, there are body image issues, there’s sextortion, online predators, bullying. There are so many different harms for them to try and manage and kids just don’t have the skills or the life experience to be able to manage those well,” said Ryan to AP.

Another advocate for social media restrictions, Robb Evans, stands for the ban. Evans’ 15-year-old daughter died tragically and he blames social media for her eating disorders. These would have protected her. Liv can’t have a voice now, but I know that she wanted to achieve change for other young girls and people suffering from eating disorders,” he said to SBS News. “Social media is a big part of that, and it’s getting worse for our kids, so I feel that this is just the right thing to do.”

It’s Happening—But Where’s the Incentive?

While politicians, organizations, and parents argue about what’s right or wrong, children’s voices remain at a lower volume.

“As a member of Gen Z, social media has shaped my life in more ways than I can count,” wrote student activist Jess Travers-Wolf for The Guardian, opposing Albanese’s measure. “I’ve never known a world without social media. It’s essential to teach children how to coexist with social media, rather than ban them from it.”

It made me think: Are we taking the time to step into this young generation’s shoes? They are being “punished” for doing something every kid—in a non-strict household—would do anywhere in the world: use, learn, create, and interact through social media.

Generation Alpha grew up in a digital world, connected to screens and observing their parents and society’s reliance and dependence on smartphones since birth and now their lives will be affected.

The government will be taking away something they love, something they treasure, something they invest time and effort in: followers, creative videos, entertainment, virtual communities, and communication with friends and family members.

There’s going to be a grieving process no one is addressing, and a punishment with no rewards on the horizon so far. What are the benefits of these measures besides the expected better mental health of this social experiment? Where is the free access to parks, sportive activities, or the new exciting and modern educational programs for them?

Everything suggests that the ban on TikTok, Instagram, X, Threads, Facebook, Snapchat, and possibly YouTube is coming—it’s decided—but perhaps the focus for a successful outcome is in the wrong direction.