Social media ban sparks worldwide discussion

In December 2025, Australia will become the first country to ban children under 16 from using social media.

Citing studies showing that overuse of platforms like Meta/Facebook, X/Twitter, and TikTok harms young people's mental health, Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese argues that the ban addresses a critical public health emergency, igniting a fiery debate.

Across the globe, many will be watching to see whether Australia's experiment in digital sovereignty to protect its youth succeeds or fails.

Australia's ban on children under 16 from social media platforms draws a line in the digital sand. This proposal is far more than a domestic policy debate; it is a bold and far-reaching experiment, positioning the nation as a global laboratory for one of the most pressing questions of our time.

From Silicon Valley to Brussels, policymakers, tech executives, and parents are watching this grand experiment unfold. Will Australia pioneer a new way to safeguard children's mental health, or will the ban erode their learning and social ties?

Australia is facing a real, growing crisis. Young people who spend too many hours on social media are more likely than others to experience depression or self-harm, according to numerous studies.

Beyond the risk of addiction, the platforms' very design presents other dangers. Anonymity breeds cruelty, allowing cyberbullying to thrive without real-world consequences and leaving deep psychological scars on its victims.

Additionally, algorithms trap young minds in echo chambers, making them vulnerable to manipulation and misinformation, while constant social comparison with the curated, idealized lives of their peers fuels anxiety and erodes self-worth at a critical stage of identity formation.

From this perspective, the Australian government's move is not paternalistic overreach but a logical — if blunt — public health intervention. The government sees its ban as a wise and necessary measure.

"Social media is doing social harm to our kids. We've called time on it," Albanese said during a press conference in November 2024. "We want our kids to have a childhood."

A vanguard of digital governance, Australia's ban marks a dramatic escalation in its long-standing policy trajectory shaped by the eSafety Commissioner's technology regulation standards.

Some argue that the ban will be impossible to enforce effectively. Tech-savvy teenagers using VPNs can easily bypass digital gates, while overzealous filters may block too much, stifling free speech, learning, and social connections, especially among marginalized youth or immigrants seeking real community and belonging.

If the ban improves young people's mental health without creating a digital black market or crippling online conversations, it will be hailed as a visionary act of political courage. If it fails to be enforced or isolates vulnerable groups, it will become a cautionary tale about the limits of state power in a borderless digital world.

Like many medium-sized markets, Australia is large enough to matter to tech giants but not large enough to dictate terms. Its policies and their consequences will therefore serve as lessons for other nations facing similar debates and designing their own social media rules.

The reaction from Silicon Valley will be the first major test. Social media companies like Meta and TikTok have expressed concern and disappointment over Australia's ban on social media for under-16s, criticizing the legislation as rushed and lacking proper consultation or evidence. They argue the ban could drive young users toward less safe corners of the internet and point out that their platforms already include age-appropriate safety features.

Indeed, other Western nations have taken different paths. Rather than banning social media, the European Union seeks to rein in Big Tech through transparency requirements and risk assessments under its Digital Services Act and General Data Protection Regulation.

By contrast, in the United States, lobbyists and constitutional challenges citing free speech have tied the hands of the federal government, while states like Florida and Texas have introduced their own social media bans for minors under 14 and 18, respectively, creating a chaotic legal briar patch.

Time will tell which path proves better.

Written by Chiu Mingming, chair professor of Analytics and Diversity, and Gu Jiapei, postdoctoral fellow, Analytics/Assessment Research Centre, The Education University of Hong Kong.