It’s Debatable – Inside Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban

It’s Debatable – A Youth Perspective

Inside Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban: What We Know (And What We Don’t)

“Social media is doing social harm to our children, and I want Australian parents to know that we have their backs”

That is the message from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in the lead up to 10 December, which is when the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 officially comes into effect. In other words, it’s the day of reckoning for the government’s Under 16 Social Media Ban.

From that day onwards, select social media platforms – including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, X, Threads, Reddit and TikTok – will face hefty fines of up to $49.5 million if they don’t take “reasonable steps” to prevent underage account holders.

Dr Susan Grantham, a communications lecturer and social media researcher at Griffith University, agrees that “something needs to be done” but is highly sceptical of a move she considers plain “confusing” and “certainly not the answer”.

Because despite efforts to educate parents, including a local forum from Brisbane’s federal MP Madonna Jarrett, many questions are still left unanswered. How much will the list of affected platforms change? What’s in place to support young content creators? Also, is it really any better for a child to just start using their parent’s unfiltered account?

And of course, the elephant in the room: what exactly are the reasonable steps social media companies will be expected to take in response? Because while 16-year-old Aled reckons it’s “a good idea in principle”, he’s fairly certain kids are “just going to go other sites or find workarounds”. Which just about sums up the biggest question hanging over the ban. How will it be implemented?

All we really know is that the ‘reasonable steps’ won’t involve a Digital ID. In fact, that was such a big freedom/privacy concern that the legislation explicitly prohibits social media companies from pushing a Digital ID as their sole method of access. So, what does that leave? AI facial age detectors? Data-scraping? Behaviour pattern tagging?

Regardless of what floats to the surface, Aled reckons most young people are “optimistic about their ability to cheat the system”. And at this stage, that confidence seems pretty well-earnt.

Even in the best-case scenario, Dr Grantham remains greatly concerned that all the move will do is “hand teenagers the keys to social media at 16 without any education, training and critical thinking development”. In her view, there’s simply no point in delaying access to platforms that will just continue to fester and grow ever worse.

Or maybe as 17-year-old Lara puts it, that’s what the media coverage is getting wrong. She believes that since social media is proven to be “terrible for brain development”, any step to limit it at those crucial ages is a good step.

It’s a sentiment shared by Aled who (despite his misgivings) holds onto a hope that the ban will “reduce pressure” on his younger sisters to have those platforms and to keep up all the engagement. And perhaps that’s the most compelling argument in favour of the ban. The power of social media often lies in its ubiquity, in just how pervasive and essential it seems to function as an everyday person.

And that weakening effect might be the ban’s greatest strength, even if implementation falters. Even if the ban gets just 70%, 50%, even 30% of young people off those platforms, then it’s done a great deal to weaken the hold social media has over teenagers. Maybe the only reason someone doesn’t quit social media is because the group chat is on Instagram and they don’t want to miss out.

Many experts, including Dr Grantham, would argue that the only way to truly counter that constant pressure is through education both within families and schools. Regardless, working to remove the universal weight of social media is an admirable goal.

It’s a cliché to say teenagers can’t live without social media but there’s a level of truth to it. We’re hardwired for social engagement and reward. There’s a primal fear of social isolation that we’ll do just about anything to avoid and that social media companies certainly prey on.

But is this the right way to counter that pressure? Experts and teenagers alike are certainly torn on what impact this ban will truly have. However, if there’s one thing everyone agrees on, it’s that this legislation is a landmark move. From Silicon Valley and Washington to Brussels and Beijing, the world is watching with great interest and will long associate this move with Australia.

But will we be remembered as the trailblazing pioneers of the 21st century or foolish outliers who missed the point? Well, we can add that to the list – right alongside implementation methods, educational alternatives, and enforcement mechanisms – as another question without an answer.

Author: Leonard Cavallaro.

Images credits: Leonard Cavallaro and Unsplash.

Further reading: 

An article published in The Conversation by Dr Grantham on educating young people about social media – click here

FAQs on Social Media Ban from the eSafety Commissioner – click here