By Charlotte Webster–
Australia has enacted an unprecedented ban on social media for users aged under 16, causing millions of children and teenagers to lose access to their accounts.
In a bold and world-first move that has triggered immediate global headlines and mixed emotions across the nation, Australia has officially banned children under the age of 16 from accessing major social media platforms.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The unprecedented landmark legislation, which came into effect at midnight across the country on December 10, 2025, forces tech giants to deactivate accounts belonging to millions of underage users and implement stringent age verification measures or face massive fines.
The government, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, has championed the move as a necessary step to protect young people from the documented harms of social media, including cyberbullying, addiction, exposure to self-harm content, and body image issues.
Under the law, the platforms themselves will carry the responsibility of ensuring age-compliance, not the children or parents. Parents cannot give consent for their child to hold the accounts if they are under 16.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Critics, however, argue the ban is a “blunt instrument” that infringes upon the rights of young people, compromises user privacy through age verification technology, and could push vulnerable teenagers into unregulated corners of the internet.
As Wednesday morning arrived in Australia, millions of children and teenagers found themselves locked out of platforms that have defined their social lives for years. The new law designates a list of “age-restricted social media platforms” that must prevent users under 16 from creating new accounts and take “reasonable steps” to deactivate existing ones.
The list currently includes Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X, YouTube, Reddit, Threads, Kick, and Twitch.
The legislation places the enforcement burden squarely on the tech companies, not the individual child or parent. Platforms face substantial financial penalties of up to A$49.5 million (around $32 million USD) for serious or repeated breaches.
The push for the ban gained rapid momentum following the publication of American psychologist Jonathan Haidt’s book The Anxious Generation in March 2024, which links the rise of smartphones and social media to declining youth mental health.
South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas, a key architect of the push, was reportedly inspired by the book and successfully advocated for a federal law, which was passed with bipartisan support in November 2024.
“We want our kids to have a childhood and parents to know we have their backs,” Prime Minister Albanese stated after the bill passed the Senate last year.
The government and its supporters argue that the health risks associated with excessive social media use are clear and present. Research commissioned by the Australian government in 2023 found that four out of five children aged eight to 16 use social media, often starting at age 10 or 12.
Proponents of the ban highlight the platforms as hotbeds for cyberbullying, exposure to self-harm content, and online predation.
Mia Bannister, whose teenage son Ollie died by suicide last year after facing online bullying and being exposed to dieting videos that fueled an eating disorder, became a vocal advocate for the change. “I’m sick of the social media giants shirking responsibility,” she told AFP ahead of the ban.
Parent groups largely support the government’s intervention, with a YouGov poll finding that 77% of Australians were in favour of the ban.
Many parents, view the law as a “godsend” that removes the pressure of being the sole enforcer of screen time limits.
“If everybody misses out, no one misses out,” said a co-founder of a parents’ alliance aimed at delaying smartphone use, reflecting a shared sentiment that parental control alone was insufficient against the addictive algorithms designed by Big Tech. The Counter-Narrative: Rights, Realities, and Workarounds
The government’s move has not been without significant controversy. Critics label the legislation a “blunt instrument” that disregards the voices and rights of children.
Two teenagers, 15-year-olds Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, have already launched a High Court challenge, arguing the law is unconstitutional and restricts their right to free communication. “We shouldn’t be silenced. It’s like Orwell’s book 1984, and that scares me,” Neyland said in a statement.
The Australian Human Rights Commission has also expressed “serious reservations” about the potential interference with children’s rights.
Critics note that social media is the primary way modern teenagers communicate, build communities, and explore identity, especially for those in isolated rural areas or LGBTQ+ youth seeking support networks. The ban, they fear, will cut off these vital connections and may drive teens to “darker, less regulated corners of the internet” where age verification is non-existent.
“None of the harmful content would be removed. It just kicks the can down the road and throws you into the deep end at 16,” argued Leo Puglisi, a 17-year-old who runs a youth-focused news site.
Concerns also persist about the practical enforcement of the ban. verify ages, platforms are expected to use age assurance technologies, such as scanning official IDs or using facial recognition.
This raises significant privacy issues for all users who may be forced to hand over biometric or government data. Lawmakers who grew up with technology remain sceptical of its effectiveness, noting how easy it is to bypass such restrictions with VPNs or simple hacks.
A Global Test Case
Australia’s bold step is being watched with intense interest by policymakers around the world. The UK’s technology secretary has suggested a similar ban is “on the table,” while Norway has pledged to follow suit. France already has legislation requiring parental consent for users under 15, and some US states, like Florida, have attempted total bans for younger teens, though those face legal challenges.
Australia has set the highest global standard a mandatory minimum age of 16 without parental consent exemptions, Australia has set the highest standard globally.
“This is a hugely important test case,” said Michael Posner, director of the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights. “If it succeeds… a number of states, a number of governments are going to say, ‘Wow, look what they did in Australia.’”
Big Tech, which lobbied hard against the bill, has criticized it as rushed and unworkable but has indicated it will comply with the new rules to avoid fines. As millions of screens went dark for Australia’s youth today, the long-term social and cultural impact of this unprecedented ban remains an open and highly contentious question.
Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Kick, Twitch and TikTok are expected to all honur the ban Wednesday to remove accounts held by users under 16 years of age in Australia, and prevent those teens from registering new accounts.
Hand on phone with many social media icons including X, Snapchat, Instagram and TikTok.
There have been some teething problems with the ban’s implementation. Guardian Australia has received several reports of those under 16 passing the facial age assurance tests, but the government has flagged it is not expecting the ban will be perfect from day one.
All listed platforms apart from X had confirmed by Tuesday they would comply with the ban. The eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, said it had recently had a conversation with X about how it would comply, but the company had not communicated its policy to users.
Bluesky, an X alternative, announced on Tuesday it would also ban under-16s, despite Safety assessing the platform as “low risk” due to its small user base of 50,000 in Australia.
Children had spent the past few weeks undertaking age assurance checks, swapping phone numbers and preparing for their accounts to be deactivated.
The Australian chief executive and co-founder of the age assurance service k-ID, Kieran Donovan, said his service had conducted hundreds of thousands of age checks in the past few weeks. The k-ID service was being used by Snapchat among others.
Others said the ban “can’t come quickly enough”. One parent said their daughter was “completely addicted” to social media and the ban “provides us with a support framework to keep her off these platforms”.
The Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese, said in an opinion piece on Sunday: “From the beginning, we’ve acknowledged this process won’t be 100% perfect. But the message this law sends will be 100% clear … Australia sets the legal drinking age at 18 because our society recognises the benefits to the individual and the community of such an approach.
“The fact that teenagers occasionally find a way to have a drink doesn’t diminish the value of having a clear, national standard.”
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar