Under 16s now banned from social media in Australia, what do you think?

Question

Effective 10 December 2025, Australia now bans people under 16 years old from accessing social media sites.

The ban, aimed at protecting kids from what officials say are highly addictive platforms, will affect the nearly 86% of Australians between the ages of eight and 15 who used social media in the country, according to the Australian government. Social media companies—including Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, X, Reddit, Kick, Twitch, and Facebook—are now required to institute age verification or face a fine of up to ~$32 million for repeated offenses.

Initial reports are already surfacing of the verification systems incorrectly identifying teens’ ages, and of users illegally evading the ban with VPNs.

What do you think of this?

Should a similar ban be instituted in other countries?

[news item courtesy of Morning Brew]

RandomGirl42 · Accepted Answer

"highly addictive platforms"

I don't think banning is the answer. It's like prohibition. people are inventive and will find a way around it. The internet is a tool like any other. people need to be taught how to use it.

In my own experience we were raised with very limited access. Our parents basically "banned" us from it so when I finally got the chance you better believe this girl went hog wild and as a result got myself into some potentially dangerous situations because of my ignorance. If I had been taught how to use it responsibly I could have saved myself a lot of grief.

I also believe this day and age kids need to be exposed to the net, again, a great tool for learning about the world and meeting new people from all over, right at your fingertips. A priceless education in itself. Kids without it are going to be "left behind."

emeraldsaphire · Accepted Answer

So kids under 16 can't even watch YouTube? That's dumb. So I don't think people under 18 should be on twitter, or ig, or most social media apps. When I was a kid we had our own little social sites. Club penguin, Toon town etc. Sites that were made to be safe for kids. They weren't always perfect, but you can add a lot more protections to a site that's made for kids. You can have lots of parental controls and other things too.

And lets be honest for a second. None of this is about helping kids. If they cared about kids they wouldn't have done the lock downs in 2020. They wouldn't be running deficits every year, they'd not support the current model of education. I could go on. This is about trying to deanonymize the web. Label social media as addictive so they can control it more. That's what this is all about.

RavVid · Accepted Answer

It has been reasonably well received after long debate.

A campaign for taking social media away from snotty nosed kids was started by a conservative newspaper with a long tradition of campaigns for social change. It was prompted by youth suicides driven by social media bullying. The campaign was called "Let Them Be Kids" - catchy

After winning this one, they are working on jailing youth criminals which will be a good one too.

I think it will be beneficial aside from stopping cyber bullying. Less disruption of homework. More time for sports.

Over 16's universally believe the snotties need more discipline :)

As to if other countries should that's up to them.

Friendlybro79 · Accepted Answer

Under 100 banned from social media would be better lol. I started a fun chain reaction with 3 of my friends that moved states away from me. I wrote one of them a letter as a joke. When I was a kid I wrote a letter to my friend and asked if he wanted to come over on the weekend to play hockey lol. And he replied. He lived 3 doors down hahaha. It was a joke then too.

I wrote him a letter recently and then we started going old school with another friend and we all admitted it's still fun to receive a hand written letter. We'll pick up the phone or get on zoom now and then but sometimes I miss the good old pre internet days.

Phoenix98 · Answer

It's not going to work. People will always find a way, the recent terrorist attack there proved it with their gun laws. When someone really wants to do something no law is going to stop them achieving what they're setting out to do.

As they keep tightening the noose around their peoples necks I wonder what will happen first will the people let themselves hang or will they cut themselves free.

And your absolutely right bans don't work they have never have. People will always find ways to outsmart the system or take advantage of the corruption in it. And most of these kids at 16 are more tech savvy and intelligent then the people who wrote the law to begin with.

Just another classic case of the government trying to raise peoples kids for them. And control everything.

Anonymous · Answer

We all know how strict things are for everyone in North Korea when it comes to social media. Access is not allowed on phones, or the internet, except to what the dictator allows one to see. A citizen literally risks being sent to a death prison if they are caught with unauthorized media...and yet, despite these terrifying odds, there are defectors that report that media got in, some people had secret phones, those with certain connections could access the world wide web.

So as with anything in life that you put a fence around, you restrict access to, or you deny people, they will find a way. You're talking under 16s who grew up with technology at their fingertips and have been skirting their parents parental controls their whole lives. This will do and accomplish nothing.

purplepoppy · Answer

Expect to see a flood of aussies come to gag.

It sounds harsh but most under 16s are idiots and easily fooled by political misinformation. Perhaps it's necessary to stop them being brainwashed in their youth.

So many of our biases are the result of indoctrination when we are young and unthinking.

Genie23 · Answer

I support it because I feel protective of kids. I wouldn’t want my kids or nephews/nieces on social media before they’re at least 16–17, as it can affect their mental health, expose them to inappropriate content, and impact their social development. The problem is that some kids will still find ways to access it, like using a VPN. I know because I played PUBG after it was banned in my country by doing the same.

TsundereMatrix · Answer

I don’t think it’s the worst idea. Some are good to go forth with that like Twitter and TikTok because there’s a lot of trolls on there but YouTube doesn’t really make sense because they do have content for kids that are under age 16.

I also hear Reddit is suing the Australian government for that because they say the government is restricting children from receiving news and having a political opinion.

Levin · Answer

Well, we have something similar with banning 'harmful' material, ie porn.

I guess most people just got a VPN.

Kids will either get a VPN or get around it using some other means. They're far more digitally savvy than the halfwit politicians who made the laws.

Now of course, social media is garbage and damaging to children. But heed needs to be paid to what practically works, given the cat is out of the bag.

genericname85 · Answer

i think it's not about the minors at all. i think it's a legislative trick to get peoples actual real id. cause imagine the money making potential for social media, if the people on there were actually real people and not just 70% bots. and also the government is drooling for the personal data and the power that comes from it. of course they'll make it about "catching criminals" but it's really about controlling everyone.

Anonymous · Answer

Bad idea because my generation is living its whole lives and careers on social media. I would not be able to get through a day on my job without a working understanding of every bit of it, and I'm not even in the social media industry. If you don't let them start learning it until age 16, they're going to fall way behind. It's like taking books away from people in the olden days.

msc545 · Answer

This is a really bad idea, and it's going to lead to a lot of social isolation and a lot of mental illness among teenagers who are used to socializing with each other over social media. They are not going to start walking around on the streets to chat with each other.

Kelley1 · Answer

That is not surprising, They are not allowed to vote so it is understandable that the government discriminates against them. The USA discriminates against then young when issuing driving licenses.

Bex_2 · Answer

Will be interesting to see how it works in practice and whether it forces social media companies in other countries to be more proactive in taking down harmful content and \ or beefing up age verification.

strateguy632 · Answer

Wrong reason but it can take loads of time. I agree with 'age ban' below 18! due to bullying each other at peer pressure age. The verification is dumb because kids will lie about age. The punishment is gross because company asked age.

Nikki1989 · Answer

It should have happened worldwide a long time ago, but I doubt if it will work 100%. Many kids will find a workaround. Furthermore, they are trying to ban social media while leaving porn alone. Yeah, that makes real sense.

DishLady · Answer

That's how EMAIL used to be here -- under 14 = no email. Kids figured out how to fake it anyway.  G@G is crawling with old people masquerading as tweens and vice versa as well...

lightbulb27 · Answer

It's a good idea except when they hit 16, they need to be slowly weened into it. to be honest, I think most of us need to be banned from it until we an pass a test.

Xawyx-2 · Answer

Great, finally, all the countries in the world should follow that example.

Chloe1808 · Answer

In reality it's an easy fix to get round the ban, my dad said all they need to do is use a VPN which makes the ban useless

Apple1996 · Answer

It should be this way everywhere. Kids do not need social media

Jennz6 · Answer

Really? They should do that for the entire world 🌎

Finchie40 · Answer

I think social media should be banned for everyone, this society has turned to hell on a hand basket from it

Proudblondewoman · Answer

Parents should be responsible for their kids. Not the government. The government always makes everything they take control of much worse.

Ariesman81 · Answer

A lot of shitty parents gonna be upset that they actually have to parent now.

Chazmatazz269 · Answer

Government overreach. That’s the parents’ responsibility.

Nicole12t · Answer

Well i dont think its a good idea as they will just say there older, i mean banning stuff never really works.

Filthy_Immigrant · Answer

that's marvelous! children need to start behaving like children again and enjoy life more often

Jackblue · Answer

That is a stupid law, we should be giving the youth more freedom not less. Isolating young people is how abusers get away with what they do.

Anonymous · Answer

Pros and cons. I do think social media has had a notable affect on young people, but I'm sure there's plenty of positives, too. Ultimately it's not the role of most governments to parent people'd children like that.

itsgreattobewhite · Answer

Just another bullshit law for the government to control and datamine people.

loveslongnails · Answer

I think it's going to prove to be an ineffective substitute for good parenting.

Anonymous · Answer

It’s good. Social media is bad for the mental health. Under 16s brains are still growing.

LongLiveBillGates · Answer

They need to ban all white supremacists CONspiracy theorists and CONservatives from social media worldwide. Or better yet arrest them and throw them in prison.

Awesomesauce2005 · Answer

Nothing should be banned or outlawed except for murder, rape, and theft.

AngryCarl2 · Answer

It's a good idea in theory which won't work in practice. Like capitalism.

Steve-the-lion · Answer

They're just afraid that more and more young people are getting their information from social media instead of the brainwashing TV.

foxsquirrell · Answer

I think they see it as cruel, but it is good for them.

blackeagle007 · Answer

Under 18 needs to stay of the internet period

Subgurl · Answer

I think it’s a good thing. Social media isn’t good for kids and there is no good reason for them to have it.

BCRanger10 · Answer

If true, I'm all in on it.

sage2021 · Answer

I think that's great 👍🏼

exitseven · Answer

I think it isa joke and cannot be enforced.

Desi_Butcher · Answer

Good thought but don't think they can stop it

Cidknee · Answer

Good deal. Hope it catches on.

Iron_Man · Answer

we need to ask Poppy what she thinks

hafinjun · Answer

How do you enforce that sort of thing i wonder

chickychickyparmparm · Answer

It's a great idea.

shortster · Answer

Good idea, but good luck enforcing it.

Erellvy · Answer

I think it’s good.

beenherebefore · Answer

Great decision!

Aakash_Hangargi · Answer

Good thing

DrPepper12 · Answer

GREAT idea 💡💯

Evsisa · Answer

Great.

Clyde_123 · Answer

Thats good.

DextroShade · Answer

I support this!

alapaosimwwiiwu · Answer

Stupid desicion

robocop666 · Answer

good

Under 16s now banned from social media in Australia, what do you think?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Under 16s now banned from social media in Australia, what do you think?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.