 |
| A 3D rendered image comprised of popular social media logos |
When the clock struck midnight on December 10, 2025, Australia quietly enacted a social experiment being watched by the world. An estimated two million children and teenagers under the age of 16 found themselves abruptly logged out of their digital lives. In a world-first move, the Australian government mandated that ten major social media platforms take "reasonable steps" to prevent underage users from holding accounts, or face staggering fines of up to $49.5 million AUD.
The policy, championed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as a "historic reform," aims to shield young Australians from what eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant describes as the "pressures and risks" of social media, including design features that encourage excessive screen time and content that harms mental health. At a launch event in Sydney, Albanese framed the moment as a watershed: "This is the day when Australian families are taking back power from these big tech companies".
What the Law Actually Does
Contrary to being called a "ban," officials describe the policy more precisely as a mandatory minimum age restriction. Its core mandate is clear: platforms, not children or parents, bear the legal responsibility. They must deploy age-assurance technologies to identify and remove underage accounts.
The list of "age-restricted social media platforms" is targeted and specific, based on services that enable online social interaction, linking between users, and posting material. The initial ten platforms are:
- Facebook, Instagram, and Threads (Meta)
- TikTok (ByteDance)
- X (formerly Twitter)
- YouTube (Alphabet)
- Snapchat
- Twitch and Kick (live-streaming)
Notably, the law excludes standalone messaging services and online gaming apps like WhatsApp, Discord, and Roblox, a distinction that has sparked debate about consistency.
For detailed, official information on the age restrictions, including guidance for parents and platforms, visit the eSafety Commissioner's dedicated hub.
A Global Test Case
Australia is not acting in a vacuum. Governments worldwide, grappling with a youth mental health crisis often linked to social media use, are watching this rollout intently as a live policy test.
The experiment has already inspired action elsewhere. Malaysia, Denmark, and Norway have announced intentions to adopt similar bans. The European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution in November 2025 advocating for a minimum age of 16 for social media access. In the United States, figures like Senator Josh Hawley have publicly endorsed the Australian model.
High-profile advocates like American social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, author of "The Anxious Generation," have cheered the move. "Bravo Australia," Haidt posted on X, adding that the nation was "freeing kids under 16 from the social media trap".
Implementation: A Messy and Uneven Rollout
The first days of the ban revealed the immense challenge of digitally age-gating an entire generation. While most major platforms, after initial resistance, confirmed they would comply, the process has been imperfect.
Age-assurance technology, which includes facial age estimation, analysis of user behavior, or verification via ID or bank details, proved fallible. There were widespread reports of teens fooling facial-scanning software or using older siblings' identities, while others posted triumphant messages online about evading detection. Searches for Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) in Australia spiked, with one free provider reporting a 400% increase in installations in the 24 hours after the law took effect.
Platforms not on the banned list saw immediate surges. Downloads of the photo-sharing apps Yope and Lemon8 skyrocketed as teens sought alternatives, prompting eSafety to contact these companies about self-assessment.
Voices of Support and Dissent
Public opinion in Australia has been broadly supportive, with polls showing around two-thirds to three-quarters of voters in favor of the restrictions. For many parents and advocates, the law is a crucial lifeline.
Wayne Holdsworth, who campaigned for the law after his son died by suicide following online bullying and sextortion, called it a vital start. "Our kids that we’ve lost haven’t died in vain," he said. Other parents welcomed the external reinforcement to help manage their children's screen time.
However, a chorus of critics argues the policy is misguided. Human rights and digital rights groups, including Amnesty Tech, warn it infringes on freedom of expression and access to information, pushing teens to less regulated, potentially darker corners of the internet. Some teens and experts argue that digital literacy education, not blunt restriction, is the true solution.
The most significant opposition is moving to the courts. Reddit has filed a challenge in Australia's High Court, arguing the law is unconstitutional as it infringes on an implied freedom of political communication. They, along with a separate case brought by a digital rights group on behalf of two 15-year-olds, will argue the law isolates teens from age-appropriate political and community discussions.
The Long Game and What Comes Next
The Australian government acknowledges the rollout is a process, not an instant fix. Prime Minister Albanese has compared it to alcohol restrictions, noting, "The fact that teenagers occasionally find a way to have a drink doesn’t diminish the value of having a clear, national standard".
eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant is playing the "long game." Her office has already sent compulsory notices to the ten platforms, demanding data on how many underage accounts were deactivated. This data, to be made public before Christmas, will form a baseline for measuring compliance. An independent academic review is scheduled for 2027 to study the law's impacts on everything from mental health and sleep to academic performance.
The global implications are profound. As nations worldwide observe Australia's ambitious experiment, its successes and failures will likely shape the next decade of internet regulation for young people. The question, as posed by Albanese, now echoes in capitals around the globe: "If Australia can do it, why can't we?".
The following table summarizes the key positions of the major stakeholders in Australia's social media age restriction policy: