Ask Onix
Australia enforces world-first under-16 social media ban
Australia's pioneering restriction on social media access for users under 16 has drawn sharp resistance from global platforms, which fear the policy could set a precedent for other nations, the country's eSafety Commissioner told the BBC.
Tech industry reluctance
Julie Inman Grant, Australia's eSafety Commissioner, described social media companies as having entered the regulatory regime "kicking and screaming," emphasizing their deep reluctance to comply. The ban, implemented in December, requires platforms to block accounts belonging to users under 16, a move closely monitored by governments worldwide.
The UK is among those considering similar measures, with the House of Lords recently voting to support an under-16 ban via an amendment to the government's schools bill.
Policy rationale and early results
Australian authorities justified the ban as necessary to shield children from harmful content and addictive algorithms on platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok. While companies like Meta have acknowledged the need for stronger youth protections, they argue that a blanket ban is not the solution, a view echoed by some experts.
In a progress update this month, the Australian government reported that 4.7 million accounts identified as belonging to children had been shut down, hailing the policy as a significant success.
"Children have proven to be an incredibly lucrative market for these platforms, which were originally designed for adults. They're building a pipeline for the future, and they do not want this to be the first domino."
Julie Inman Grant, eSafety Commissioner
Compliance challenges and enforcement
Inman Grant acknowledged that tech companies lack strong incentives to fully comply with the ban, noting that regulators have had to "play a dance" with platforms that resist oversight. With the law in effect for just over a month, researchers are still assessing its impact on youth behavior online.
Critics had warned that under-16s might migrate to alternative platforms or bypass age verification systems, but Inman Grant said data showed no sustained increase in usage of other apps after an initial spike in downloads. However, concerns persist about children finding ways to circumvent the restrictions, potentially exposing them to less secure online spaces.
Under the law, companies face fines of up to A$49.5 million ($33 million) for failing to take "reasonable steps" to keep children off their platforms. Inman Grant revealed that a second round of compliance notices is imminent, with Snapchat identified as a key focus due to apparent weaknesses in its age verification systems.
Broader concerns over online safety
Inman Grant also highlighted Australia's collaboration with "like-minded" countries, including the UK, to address platforms where violent extremist content remains accessible to minors. She cited the case of Axel Rudakubana, the Southport attacker who reportedly viewed graphic footage of the stabbing of Australian bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel on X before carrying out his own assault.
"When terrorist violent content is so openly available to young children, it normalizes, desensitizes, and sometimes radicalizes. At some point, you have to take a stand."
Julie Inman Grant
Global implications and legal pushback
Australia's policy stands out as the strictest in the world, not only for its higher age threshold of 16 but also for its refusal to allow exemptions based on parental consent. Ten platforms are currently subject to the ban: Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, and streaming services Kick and Twitch.
The law does not cover dating apps, gaming platforms like Roblox and Discord, or AI chatbots, which have recently faced scrutiny for harmful interactions with minors, including alleged encouragement of self-harm and inappropriate conversations.
Social media companies have pushed back against the legislation, with Meta arguing that age verification should occur at the app store level to reduce compliance burdens. Reddit, while complying with the ban, has launched a legal challenge in Australia's highest court, contending that the policy infringes on privacy and political rights.
Australia's Communications Minister Anika Wells has dismissed legal threats, reaffirming the government's commitment to the policy.
"We will not be intimidated by big tech. On behalf of Australian parents, we will stand firm."
Anika Wells, Communications Minister
