Australia’s Big Social Media Ban For Under-16's Is About To Come Into Effect
Australia is about to flick the switch on a world-first rule that forces kids under 16 off major social media platforms. Starting 10th December, more than a million accounts are expected to disappear as platforms like Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Facebook, Reddit and X take “reasonable steps” to block under-16s. It’s the toughest law of its kind anywhere: there won’t be an option for parents to provide consent for their under-16’s to use social media, and there will be no exceptions.
Prime minister Anthony Albanese insists the goal isn’t punishment. In a message to young people, he said: “From December 10 if you’re under 16 you’re no longer allowed to have a social media account. You’ll know better than anyone what it’s like growing up with algorithms, endless feeds and the pressure that can come with that. That’s why we’ve taken this step to support you.” He urged teens to reach out to trusted adults if the transition feels rough — and to actually enjoy the summer instead of spending the time endlessly scrolling.
Why Is Australia Banning Social Media For Under-16’s?
For years, concerns about teens being hit with addictive algorithms, harmful content, and online exploitation have been growing. Former Facebook Australia boss Stephen Scheeler once believed social media would democratise the world, but even he admits, “There’s lots of good things about these platforms, but there’s just too much bad stuff.”
Government-commissioned research found that 96% of kids aged 10–15 are on social media, and most have seen damaging material like eating-disorder content, violent videos or misogynistic posts. A worrying number have experienced grooming or cyberbullying.
Communications Minister Anika Wells framed the ban bluntly, calling algorithms “behavioral cocaine.” She argues the big tech companies had “15, 20 years” to fix the problems — and didn’t.
How Have Teenagers Responded?
Some young people agree the platforms aren’t safe, with apps like Snapchat making it too easy for strangers to connect and for messages to vanish without a trace. However, others feel shut out of a discussion that affects them the most.
Noah Jones, a 15-year-old taking the government to court, says the ban limits political expression and wipes out an important source of information. He argues many teens actually learn about consent, vaping risks and social issues online.
Some teens predict the ban will just push kids to VPNs or dodgier apps anyway.
How Have The Tech Companies Responded?
Tech companies spent a year fighting the proposal. Paul Taske of industry group NetChoice called the ban “blanket censorship” and claimed it will leave kids “less informed” and “less connected.”
Platforms argue kids could be driven toward riskier spaces or private messaging apps that are harder to monitor. They also say governments should let parents decide — not enforce a universal cutoff.
Still, they’re complying, at least officially. Some, like Meta, even began shutting accounts early. Others — like Reddit — slammed the law as “arbitrary” and privacy-eroding but have confirmed that they will comply with it anyway.
Behind the scenes, companies hope that issues with implementation, the previous and ongoing legal challenges and workarounds might discourage other nations from copying Australia. As one expert noted, platforms have every incentive to “comply, but not so well that the rest of the world says, ‘Let’s do this too.’”
What About The Rest Of The World?
Countries including Denmark, Norway, Malaysia, Singapore, Brazil and several US states are watching closely. Julie Inman Grant, Australia’s online safety chief, calls the ban the “first domino.” Scheeler thinks of it as a “seatbelt moment” — not perfect, but better than doing nothing.
Meanwhile, Australian landmarks will light up in green and gold to mark day one of the new rules. Whether the ban works smoothly or sparks chaos, its impact won’t stay within Australia’s borders.
