Key Points
- Australia’s Social Media Minimum Age Bill bans under-16s from using social media and imposes fines of up to $32 million for non-compliance.
- The law will be fully enforced by 2025. It is the strictest regulation globally, differing from consent-based restrictions in other countries.
- Critics highlight risks to vulnerable youth, privacy concerns, and enforcement challenges.
- Supporters emphasize the ban’s role in combating mental health crises and cyberbullying. Public opinion strongly favors the law, with 77% of Australians in support.
Australia has passed a groundbreaking law banning social media use for children under 16, setting a global precedent for regulating Big Tech. The law, which targets platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok, imposes fines of up to A$49.5 million ($32 million) for non-compliance. A trial of enforcement methods will begin in January, with the full ban taking effect in 2025.
The Social Media Minimum Age Bill introduces one of the strictest regulations globally, mandating that platforms prevent underage access without exceptions. While countries like France and the U.S. states have implemented parental consent-based restrictions, Australia’s law is absolute, sparking debates on its implications.
The law marks a win for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, whose government faces declining approval before the 2025 election. Despite opposition from privacy advocates and child rights groups, the measure gained public support, with 77% of Australians backing the ban, according to polls.
The law emerged after a year-long parliamentary inquiry that highlighted the impact of social media on youth mental health, including testimonies from parents of children harmed by online bullying. Critics, including youth advocacy groups and the Australian Human Rights Commission, argue the ban could alienate vulnerable teens, such as LGBTQIA and migrant youth, by cutting off access to online support networks. Privacy advocates warn it could pave the way for heightened data collection and state surveillance.
In response, lawmakers introduced amendments requiring platforms to offer alternatives to identity document uploads for age verification. However, concerns persist about the lack of detailed guidance on enforcement. Tech companies, including Meta and TikTok, have yet to comment but previously called for a delay until after the enforcement trials. Critics like Digital Industry Group Australia argue the law’s rushed implementation leaves platforms unclear about compliance requirements.
Meanwhile, parents and advocates emphasize the need for intervention to combat cyberbullying and mental health crises. However, younger Australians remain skeptical, fearing the ban could drive them to riskier online spaces while failing to address underlying issues.
