Why trust Greenbot
Australia is moving toward one of the strictest social media regulations globally, proposing a ban that would prevent children under 16 from accessing platforms like TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, and X. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese introduced the legislation, emphasizing the risks social media poses to young users’ mental health. “Social media is doing harm to our kids, and I’m calling time on it,” Albanese stated in a press release.
The proposed laws are expected to be introduced to Parliament on November 18. Under the legislation, social media companies would bear the responsibility of enforcing the age restriction, with the eSafety Commissioner monitoring compliance. Any platform failing to block under-16 users would face penalties. Young users and their parents won’t face penalties, shifting accountability onto the companies.
“The onus will be on social media platforms to demonstrate they are taking reasonable steps to prevent access. The onus won’t be on parents or young people,” Albanese explained.
Tough Standards for Social Media Companies
Unlike many countries, Australia’s proposal takes a hardline approach. No parental exemptions or workarounds for children with existing accounts are being offered. This stance has sparked debate over whether banning children is more effective than teaching safe social media use.
Communications Minister Michelle Rowland called these measures “truly world-leading”.
Australia’s eSafety Commissioner will enforce the law, expecting companies to show they’ve made “reasonable steps.” Some methods being tested include age checks through biometrics or ID, though these raise privacy concerns. Opposition lawmaker Paul Fletcher supported the legislation, stressing that platforms already have the technology to implement such age checks.
Industry Concerns and Criticism
The proposal has drawn criticism from the tech industry and child advocacy groups. The Digital Industry Group (DIGI), representing major platforms like Meta, TikTok, and Google, argued that a ban could inadvertently push young people toward unregulated parts of the internet. Sunita Bose, DIGI’s managing director, described the policy as a “20th Century response to 21st Century challenges.” Instead, DIGI suggests creating safer, age-appropriate online spaces instead of strict age bans.
Child rights organizations have also voiced concerns. In an open letter last month, over 140 experts and child welfare advocates warned criticizing the ban as being too blunt to be effective. “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,” they wrote.
Dr. Philip Tam, a child psychologist, suggested a lower age limit could be more enforceable and still offer significant protections.
If Parliament approves the legislation, the ban will take effect 12 months later. During this time, companies must prepare to adapt their platforms, marking a critical test for their commitment to child safety in Australia. This approach has already received mixed responses, and only time will reveal its effectiveness in protecting children from social media’s risks.
