Australia bans teens from social media, but nobody thinks it'll really work
(2025/12/10)
- Reference: 1765321891
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/12/09/australian_social_media_ban/
- Source link:
Australia's ban on children under 16 holding active social media accounts comes into force on Wednesday. While nobody expects this world-first policy to stop every kid using their favorite online communities, its backers take solace in the mere fact it's sparked global debate.
The ban won’t stop kids using social media, and nobody disputes that. Even Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has admitted as much.
Not really a ban Australia’s social media ban isn’t really a ban, because it allows netizens of any age to use any social media service so long as they’re not logged in, or to use accounts established by someone over 16. The core requirements of the ban – formally the Social Media Minimum Age obligation – require designated platforms to cancel accounts held by anyone under 16, and to take reasonable steps not to allow anyone under that age to acquire and operate an account.
The obligation currently applies to the platforms listed below:
Facebook
Instagram
Kik
Reddit
Snapchat
Threads
TikTok
Twitch
X (formerly Twitter)
YouTube
“From the beginning, we’ve acknowledged this process won’t be 100 per cent perfect,” he [1]wrote in an opinion piece that compares the social media ban to laws that regulate underage drinking.
“The fact that teenagers occasionally find a way to have a drink doesn’t diminish the value of having a clear, national standard,” the PM added.
Albanese also said the policy is “about helping parents push back against peer pressure. You don’t have to worry that by stopping your child using social media, you’re somehow making them the odd one out.” The PM has also mentioned teen suicides linked to social media, and said the law aims to prevent further such tragedies, so no parent has to experience the anguish of losing a child to online bullying.
Unintended consequences
Having been told that the ban is essentially aspirational, Australia now waits to learn what its effect will be.
Local media is already full of stories about anguished kids whose circumstances mean [2]social media is a lifeline they [3]fear losing.
[4]
Other reports have noted a [5]sudden signup spike for apps like Lemon8 and Yope that aren’t currently covered by the ban. That surge has made prophecy out of warnings that banning social media will just see kids shift to services operated by outfits even less interested in child safety than the likes of Meta and Google, and therefore harder for Australia to regulate.
[6]New Zealand kind-of moves to ban social media for under-16s, require age checks for new accounts
[7]Australia bans kids from signing up for YouTube accounts, angering Google
[8]Whitehall rejects £1.8B digital ID price tag – but won't say what it will cost
[9]Banning VPNs to protect kids? Good luck with that
Another common theme is the ban's potential to cause privacy problems, as social media companies can choose whatever age verification technology they think is best and some have decided to work with age-verification-as-a-service companies based outside Australia. Those companies may request a photo of a government ID, or a selfie to determine users’ ages. Criminals now know those companies will soon hold personal data describing many Australians.
Or perhaps they’ll hold junk data – another common story in local media describes kids who defeat age verification tech by wearing makeup, a mask, or just lying about their age.
[10]
[11]
Retailers are also [12]worried because they think the ban will make it harder for them to attract teenage shoppers. And educators are [13]trying to figure out which YouTube videos they can set as homework .
Australia’s government plans to measure the effectiveness of the ban by considering health statistics, but has already decided the policy has succeeded for two reasons.
[14]
One is that social media companies complied without putting up much of a fight. Big Tech has fiercely fought past Australian attempts to regulate their activities. Their mostly meek response to this new law means Australia’s government has claimed a win.
The other is that several other nations – among them Malaysia, France, Denmark, and New Zealand – have expressed admiration for Australia’s law and signaled an intention to adopt their own version of a teen ban. The European Union recently [15]voted in support of a recommendation for a similar ban.
Australia’s leaders are therefore patting themselves on the back for leading the world, an attitude that’s mostly bipartisan, as the idea of the ban came from a past opposition leader.
[16]
The ban does face legal challenges. Reddit [17]reportedly plans to file a case, and another is already before Australian courts.
Another possible flashpoint will come if Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, the regulator that oversees the ban, finds some platforms in breach of the law and therefore eligible for fines of AUD$49.5 million ($33 million). The PM says the threat of those fines means Australia will “hold these social media giants to account.” But significant non-compliance, or further legal challenges, would defy Albanese’s rhetoric.
Lurking in the background is another potential source of trouble: US President Donald Trump, who has warned Europe its attempts to regulate American tech companies are unreasonable and may earn the bloc tariffs or other unfavorable treatments. The Trump administration has also been critical of some Australian policies, and this ban creates leverage Washington could use for other purposes. ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.pm.gov.au/media/protecting-australian-kids-social-media-harm
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/07/im-15-years-old-and-have-a-disability-social-media-has-been-a-lifeline-why-is-the-government-kicking-me-off
[3] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/remote-kids-social-ban-isolation/106114026
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-02/lemon8-and-yope-put-on-notice-for-social-media-ban-targets/106093818
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/07/new_zealand_kids_social_ban/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/30/australia_kids_socials_signup_ban_extended/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/09/uk_digital_id_costs/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/31/banning_vpns_to_protect_kids/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://sbaas.com.au/teen-social-media-ban-small-business-outcomes/
[13] https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1CkoZU4QcL/
[14] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[15] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20251120IPR31496/children-should-be-at-least-16-to-access-social-media-say-meps
[16] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[17] https://www.skynews.com.au/business/tech-and-innovation/tech-giant-reddit-prepares-to-launch-legal-challenge-against-albanese-governments-social-media-ban-for-under-16s/news-story/7835bd1465b039fd3f28f4e7a101d586
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
The ban won’t stop kids using social media, and nobody disputes that. Even Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has admitted as much.
Not really a ban Australia’s social media ban isn’t really a ban, because it allows netizens of any age to use any social media service so long as they’re not logged in, or to use accounts established by someone over 16. The core requirements of the ban – formally the Social Media Minimum Age obligation – require designated platforms to cancel accounts held by anyone under 16, and to take reasonable steps not to allow anyone under that age to acquire and operate an account.
The obligation currently applies to the platforms listed below:
Kik
Snapchat
Threads
TikTok
Twitch
X (formerly Twitter)
YouTube
“From the beginning, we’ve acknowledged this process won’t be 100 per cent perfect,” he [1]wrote in an opinion piece that compares the social media ban to laws that regulate underage drinking.
“The fact that teenagers occasionally find a way to have a drink doesn’t diminish the value of having a clear, national standard,” the PM added.
Albanese also said the policy is “about helping parents push back against peer pressure. You don’t have to worry that by stopping your child using social media, you’re somehow making them the odd one out.” The PM has also mentioned teen suicides linked to social media, and said the law aims to prevent further such tragedies, so no parent has to experience the anguish of losing a child to online bullying.
Unintended consequences
Having been told that the ban is essentially aspirational, Australia now waits to learn what its effect will be.
Local media is already full of stories about anguished kids whose circumstances mean [2]social media is a lifeline they [3]fear losing.
[4]
Other reports have noted a [5]sudden signup spike for apps like Lemon8 and Yope that aren’t currently covered by the ban. That surge has made prophecy out of warnings that banning social media will just see kids shift to services operated by outfits even less interested in child safety than the likes of Meta and Google, and therefore harder for Australia to regulate.
[6]New Zealand kind-of moves to ban social media for under-16s, require age checks for new accounts
[7]Australia bans kids from signing up for YouTube accounts, angering Google
[8]Whitehall rejects £1.8B digital ID price tag – but won't say what it will cost
[9]Banning VPNs to protect kids? Good luck with that
Another common theme is the ban's potential to cause privacy problems, as social media companies can choose whatever age verification technology they think is best and some have decided to work with age-verification-as-a-service companies based outside Australia. Those companies may request a photo of a government ID, or a selfie to determine users’ ages. Criminals now know those companies will soon hold personal data describing many Australians.
Or perhaps they’ll hold junk data – another common story in local media describes kids who defeat age verification tech by wearing makeup, a mask, or just lying about their age.
[10]
[11]
Retailers are also [12]worried because they think the ban will make it harder for them to attract teenage shoppers. And educators are [13]trying to figure out which YouTube videos they can set as homework .
Australia’s government plans to measure the effectiveness of the ban by considering health statistics, but has already decided the policy has succeeded for two reasons.
[14]
One is that social media companies complied without putting up much of a fight. Big Tech has fiercely fought past Australian attempts to regulate their activities. Their mostly meek response to this new law means Australia’s government has claimed a win.
The other is that several other nations – among them Malaysia, France, Denmark, and New Zealand – have expressed admiration for Australia’s law and signaled an intention to adopt their own version of a teen ban. The European Union recently [15]voted in support of a recommendation for a similar ban.
Australia’s leaders are therefore patting themselves on the back for leading the world, an attitude that’s mostly bipartisan, as the idea of the ban came from a past opposition leader.
[16]
The ban does face legal challenges. Reddit [17]reportedly plans to file a case, and another is already before Australian courts.
Another possible flashpoint will come if Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, the regulator that oversees the ban, finds some platforms in breach of the law and therefore eligible for fines of AUD$49.5 million ($33 million). The PM says the threat of those fines means Australia will “hold these social media giants to account.” But significant non-compliance, or further legal challenges, would defy Albanese’s rhetoric.
Lurking in the background is another potential source of trouble: US President Donald Trump, who has warned Europe its attempts to regulate American tech companies are unreasonable and may earn the bloc tariffs or other unfavorable treatments. The Trump administration has also been critical of some Australian policies, and this ban creates leverage Washington could use for other purposes. ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.pm.gov.au/media/protecting-australian-kids-social-media-harm
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/07/im-15-years-old-and-have-a-disability-social-media-has-been-a-lifeline-why-is-the-government-kicking-me-off
[3] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-09/remote-kids-social-ban-isolation/106114026
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-02/lemon8-and-yope-put-on-notice-for-social-media-ban-targets/106093818
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/07/new_zealand_kids_social_ban/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/30/australia_kids_socials_signup_ban_extended/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/09/uk_digital_id_costs/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/31/banning_vpns_to_protect_kids/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://sbaas.com.au/teen-social-media-ban-small-business-outcomes/
[13] https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1CkoZU4QcL/
[14] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[15] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20251120IPR31496/children-should-be-at-least-16-to-access-social-media-say-meps
[16] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aTj-ajnNocGx8l5NdheVoQAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[17] https://www.skynews.com.au/business/tech-and-innovation/tech-giant-reddit-prepares-to-launch-legal-challenge-against-albanese-governments-social-media-ban-for-under-16s/news-story/7835bd1465b039fd3f28f4e7a101d586
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
J.G.Harston
So, children that access social media will be arrested and sent to prison?
It is just too much laziness
johnrobyclayton
Parents can do their job of supervising their children's development and engagement with the outside world.
They are just too lazy to and want to government to do it for them.
Governments can create a platform for children to interact safely and is more attractive to children that everything else.
They are just too lazy to do the work of providing a safe place for their most vulnerable citizens that they will be willing to use.
Advertisers want to attract the most suggestible market to sell stuff to.
They are too lazy to sell effectively to fully self aware and competent buyers.
Children are smart, they can figure out how to get around any restriction on their freedom to interact in any way they want.
They are just too lazy to do so without complaining about the ban hammer.
Predators like to hunt vulnerable prey where they congregate.
They are just too lazy to hunt something big enough and ugly enough to take care of themselves.
I am not interested in fixing their problems for them.
I am just too lazy to care all that much about them.
"social media companies complied without putting up much of a fight."
Bebu sa Ware
Which pretty much tells you that they have determined that it is not going to make much of a difference to their bottom line and the extra data they will garner as a consequence of their enforcing the ban may well be gold.
Personally, I would be happy if they banned the whole boiling for the under 95s. :)
Blackjack
As long as Kids are allowed to use Smartphones, that they know how to use better that their parents, this ban doesn't do much at all.
VPN?
Anonymous Coward
I suspect a VPN and a new account created in the chosen VPN country would easily sidestep this?
Good, bad or ugly
It’s about time people stood up to these socially corrosive platforms. American mega corps can go fly a kite.