The Australian government has unveiled an ambitious proposal to prohibit children under 16 from accessing social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook. Described by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as a “world-leading initiative,” the proposal aims to shield children and adolescents from the negative impacts of social media, including cyberbullying, exposure to inappropriate content, and detrimental effects on mental health. However, the initiative has sparked intense public debate, dividing opinions among parents, digital behavior experts, and tech companies.

The story of James, a 12-year-old Australian boy, illustrates the risks the proposal seeks to address. James began using Snapchat at the age of 10, influenced by classmates who wanted to stay connected through the platform. However, his experience quickly turned traumatic. Following a disagreement with a friend, he was added to a group chat where two older teens began bombarding him with violent messages.

“One of them seemed to be around 17,” James told the BBC. “He sent me videos of himself swinging a machete and voice messages threatening to stab me.”

The incident left James terrified, to the point where he feared going to school. With his parents’ support, he reported the incident to school authorities and deleted his Snapchat account. For James’s mother, Emma (a pseudonym), the experience serves as a warning. She believes social media exposes children to dangers they are not mature enough to handle.

“We shouldn’t waste time trying to teach children to cope with systems designed to capture their attention and exploit their vulnerabilities. We should protect them by giving them the chance to live a full childhood, free from these pressures,” Emma said.

The proposed legislation presented in Parliament aims to create a legal framework to ban individuals under 16 from accessing social media. According to the proposal:

• Scope: The ban applies to all individuals under 16, with no exceptions, even with parental consent or for existing accounts.
• Penalties: Companies that violate the rules could face fines of up to AUD 50 million.
• Exemptions: Platforms deemed “low-risk” for children may apply for exemptions, though the criteria for this classification have yet to be defined.
• Enforcement: Regulation and oversight will be handled by the eSafety Commissioner, Australia’s internet regulatory body.

The regulations are expected to take effect 12 months after the law is passed, allowing time for adjustments and clarification on the new rules’ application.

However, the proposal has drawn criticism for leaving key questions unanswered, such as the definition of a social media platform in an ever-evolving digital landscape. Platforms like YouTube, which can be accessed without creating an account, are not included in the ban, raising concerns about the measure’s effectiveness.

Many parents, like Amy Friedlander, founder of the Wait Mate movement, see the initiative as a way to alleviate pressure on families. “For too long, parents have faced an impossible choice: give in to social pressure and provide their children with an addictive device or isolate them socially. This proposal offers a real alternative,” she said.

Nevertheless, digital behavior experts warn of potential side effects. Julie Inman Grant, head of the eSafety Commissioner, cautioned that a comprehensive ban might push children toward less-regulated platforms, exposing them to even greater risks.

“We can’t put fences in the ocean,” she said. “We need to create safe environments, like protected pools, where children can learn to navigate the digital world in a healthy and secure way.”

While the government argues that social media is directly linked to the decline in children’s and adolescents’ mental health, experts point out that the relationship is not so clear-cut. Research conducted by the eSafety Commissioner indicates that, for some vulnerable groups, such as LGBTQ+ youth and Indigenous communities, digital platforms can serve as crucial spaces for connection and acceptance.

“These young people often report feeling more comfortable online than in the physical world,” Inman Grant noted.

On the other hand, many parents highlight the harmful effects of social media, including addiction, anxiety, and exposure to inappropriate content. Amy Friedlander questions whether young children have the emotional and cognitive capacity to handle these challenges. “We can’t ignore the benefits of technology, but we must take seriously its impact on developing brains,” she said.

Australia is not the first country to attempt to regulate young people’s access to the digital environment. In 2011, South Korea banned individuals under 16 from playing online video games overnight, but the policy was repealed years later due to public resistance. Recently, France passed a law requiring parental consent for children under 15 to access social media, but many youths circumvented the restrictions using VPNs.

In the United States, similar legislation in Utah was blocked by a federal judge who deemed it unconstitutional. These examples highlight the practical and legal challenges of implementing broad restrictions in the digital world.

Australia is exploring age verification technologies to enforce the ban, but experts warn about the risks associated with storing the personal data of millions of citizens. The government has stated that privacy will be a priority but has yet to provide concrete solutions.

For many experts, such as researcher Joanne Orlando, a ban might be only part of the solution. “The biggest piece of the puzzle is teaching children to think critically about what they see online and how they use social media,” she said.

Since 2022, the Australian government has invested AUD 6 million in digital literacy tools, but studies show that many schools still do not offer regular education on the topic.

Orlando suggests a balanced approach, combining regulation with education. “Banning can be effective in the short term, but teaching children to navigate the digital world responsibly is the only sustainable solution,” she said.

Since deleting his Snapchat account, James has spent more time outdoors, playing soccer with friends and rediscovering hobbies outside the digital realm. For him, social media brought more pressure than joy.

“I hope these new laws help other kids go out and do what they love, instead of feeling like they have to be connected all the time,” he said.

Regardless of the proposal’s outcome, Australia’s initiative has highlighted the need to protect young people in the digital environment, balancing freedom, safety, and well-being. The debate about the role of social media in childhood is just beginning, but it is clear that the challenges are as significant as the opportunities to create a healthier future for the next generations.