Learn from Australia – banning social media for under-16s is no panacea
4 min read
When Australia introduced the world’s first law to restrict social media accounts for children under 16, the intention was clear: to protect young people from the addictive design, dangerous algorithms and the emotional pressure of social media use.
That goal is admirable. But a picture is emerging that holds important lessons for the UK as it weighs a similar measure.
Australia’s ban came into force on 10 December last year. Around 4.7 million Australian social media accounts believed to belong to under-16s have since been deactivated, removed or restricted by major platforms seeking to comply with their legal obligation to take “reasonable steps” to prevent underage access. That shows that big tech platforms can respond when regulation demands it.
But numbers alone do not tell us whether young people’s wellbeing is improving, nor do they explain what is happening inside homes, schools and peer groups. Compliance does not necessarily equate to cultural change. Young people are resourceful, and it appears many are finding workarounds.
Weeks into the ban, anecdotal evidence suggests some children continue to use social media by tricking age verification tests and using VPN technology to appear as though they are based outside Australia. Others are said to be using smaller social media platforms not captured by Australian law, such as gaming platforms – unregulated spaces with weaker oversight and potentially higher risks.
This reinforces a key concern I raised when the legislation was debated: forcing platforms to block accounts does not, by itself, change how young people engage online – nor does it address the business models driving harm.
Parents need practical tools, guidance and support – not just a ban
Some parents say the restrictions make it easier to say no to early social media use. Others now struggle with teens who feel angry and alienated, or whose peers remain connected despite the ban. In some households, the law has become a source of conflict.
Parents should not be left to navigate these consequences alone. They need practical tools, guidance and support – not just a ban – to help manage the disputes that inevitably arise.
It’s too early to assess the ban’s full consequences. However, young people in rural communities have warned it will make social isolation worse – especially for LGBT+ youth, for whom online spaces can be an escape from bullying and abuse in real life. Advocates warn the ban could similarly isolate young people with disabilities.
This ban risks becoming a distraction from urgent, deeper reforms. Restricting social media access does not protect children from harmful content, nor does it tackle the core drivers of harm for all users: algorithms that shape what users see, and inadequate content moderation by social media platforms. I have argued that a strong, enforceable duty of care is needed, to hold platforms responsible for harmful content such as hate speech, addiction-driven design and other risks.
In Australia’s case, the Albanese government has been highly selective in how it chooses to tackle harms to children. It announced a social media age ban just as it faced enormous pressure to ban gambling advertising – a measure that would go a long way to protecting children and vulnerable Australians. Evidence consistently shows children and teenagers are widely exposed to gambling advertising, particularly through televised sport and online video platforms. This is linked to an earlier interest in gambling and a higher risk of harmful gambling behaviours later in life.
A government truly committed to children’s wellbeing would go beyond a social media ban and tackle all the ways harmful content reaches young people.
If the UK is to learn from Australia’s experience, it should resist the temptation to treat the age ban as a panacea. Protecting children online requires a suite of measures – strong platform accountability, digital literacy, mental health support and meaningful help for parents, to name a few.
Australia’s experience so far is not a final verdict. Its early lessons should encourage sober, evidence-based policymaking in the UK. The overall aim should be not restricting social media access but building resilience and safety for a generation growing up in a complex, high-pressure digital world.
Zali Steggall is an independent MP in Australia's federal parliament
