How Australia’s controversial social media ban for children compares to other countries

New law banning social media for children under 16 ignites debate over impact on child safety, online freedom and tech policies

Australia has enacted a law banning children under 16 from social media, putting in place one of the world’s strictest measures against internet use for minors.

The new legislation has sparked a fierce discussion in the country over possible impacts on child safety, online freedom, censorship and tech policies.

The Social Media Minimum Age Bill, cleared after a heated debate in parliament, requires platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook to block under-16 users or risk fines of up to $49.5m AUD (£25.7m).

A trial of enforcement methods is set for January, with the ban coming into full force within a year.

The law was championed by the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, who presented it as a necessary measure to protect children from the harmful effects of excessive social media use.

“Platforms now have a social responsibility to ensure the safety of our kids is a priority for them,” he said. “We’re making sure that mums and dads can have that different conversation today and in future days.”

The ban is absolute, unlike similar measures in EU countries where minors may still access social media with parental permission.

Critics claim the law was rushed without due scrutiny, but proponents see it as a critical step towards safeguarding young people.

A student poses with her mobile showing her social media applications in Melbourne (Reuters)

Why the ban?

There is growing evidence linking social media use to declining mental health, particularly among teenagers. Pushing for the law, Mr Albanese highlighted specific risks such as body image issues for girls and exposure to misogynistic content for boys.

The campaign leading up to the introduction of the bill saw testimonies from parents who have lost children to bullying driven by social media, strengthening public support.

A national survey indicated that 77 per cent of Australians backed the legislation.

Media platforms, including Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, ran campaigns like Let Them Be Kids to galvanise support for the law.

But public reaction to the passage of the law has been deeply divided.

Some Australians see the new law as a much-needed intervention. “I think that’s a great idea because social media for kids is not really appropriate,” Sydney resident Francesca Sambas said, ”they can look at things they shouldn’t.”

But many regard it as an overreach.

“I am feeling very angry. I feel that this government has taken democracy and thrown it out the window,” Shon Klose, 58, another Sydney resident, said.

Social media companies have criticised the Australian ban arguing that it may push children towards online spaces that are far less regulated.

A TikTok spokesperson said the rushed legislation ignored the advice of experts. “It’s entirely likely the ban could see young people pushed to darker corners of the internet where no community guidelines, safety tools, or protections exist,” they said.

Australia Senate committee backs bill to ban social media for children (Reuters)

How does the Australian law compare globally?

• United Kingdom has no plan currently to introduce similar restrictions, but digital minister Peter Kyle has said that “everything is on the table” when it comes to ensuring online safety. He has commissioned a study to examine the impact of smartphone and social media use, particularly on children. Mr Kyle has also highlighted that Ofcom, the UK’s communications regulator, must prioritise government concerns like safety by design, transparency, and accountability while enforcing the Online Safety Act starting next year. The law, passed in 2023, sets stricter standards for social media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube and TikTok, including the enforcement of age-appropriate restrictions.

• Norway has proposed raising the age at which children can independently consent to social media terms from 13 to 15. The government has also announced a plan to introduce a legal minimum age for social media use. It is not clear when such a law might be presented to the parliament. Government data shows that half of Norway’s nine-year-olds use some form of social media.

• EU legislation mandates that parental consent is required for tech companies to process personal data of children under the age of 16. Member states have the discretion to lower this limit to 13.

• France passed legislation last year requiring social media platforms to secure parental consent before allowing children under 15 to create accounts online, but technical challenges have delayed its enforcement. Earlier this year, a panel commissioned by president Emmanuel Macron recommended stricter measures like banning mobiles for children under 11 and internet-enabled devices for those under 13. It remains unclear when or if the recommendations will be adopted.

• Germany allows children aged 13 to 16 to use social media only with parental consent. There is no plan for further restrictions, even though child protection advocates argue that existing rules need better enforcement.

• Belgium enacted a law in 2018 requiring children to be at least 13 years old to create social media accounts without parental permission.

• The Netherlands does not have legislation setting a minimum age for social media use. However, mobile devices will be banned in classrooms from January 2024 to minimise distractions. Exceptions apply for digital lessons, disabilities, or medical needs.
• Italy requires children under 14 to have parental consent for creating social media accounts. No parental consent is required after the children turn 14.

Anthony Albanese gestures during a press conference in Canberra on 29 November 2024 (AP)

Implications for privacy, freedom and tech scrutiny

The legislation has drawn criticism from privacy advocates who warn of heightened data collection risks. The Australian Human Rights Commission raised concerns about potential infringement on young people’s rights to participate in society.

“Platforms may require users to upload identification documents, paving the way for digital surveillance,” cautioned Sunita Bose, managing director of Digital Industry Group, which represents major social media firms. A last-minute amendment now requires platforms to provide alternative verification methods.

Internationally, the ban could strain Australia’s relations with the US, where Elon Musk, owner of X, called it a “backdoor way to control access to the internet by all Australians”.

Challenges in enforcement

Implementing the ban poses significant hurdles. Critics argue that the government has yet to clarify how platforms should verify users’ ages without compromising privacy. The exemption of platforms like YouTube, widely used in schools, further complicates enforcement.

Some experts fear tech-savvy teens will bypass restrictions. “It will only create a generation of young people who will be more technologically literate in bypassing these walls,” said Sydney student Enie Lam, 16.

Parental hopes and concerns

Parents’ groups have largely applauded the initiative, with anti-bullying advocate Ali Halkic stating, “Putting an age limit and giving control back to the parents is a starting point.”

But many young Australians worry about losing their vital online communities. LGBTQIA and migrant teenagers, in particular, depend on social media for support and self-expression. Critics warn that the ban could inadvertently isolate these vulnerable groups.

Additional reporting by agencies