BY THE OPTIMIST DAILY EDITORIAL TEAM Starting this week, on December 10th, Australia will become the first country to ban all children under 16 from having social media accounts. This is meant to be a sweeping law that covers TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Threads, and other popular platforms. Whether the move will meaningfully protect young people or simply push them toward digital workarounds is still unclear. The only thing that is clear is that the rest of the world is watching closely. A radical response to growing harm The ban follows a government-commissioned study released earlier this year that painted a troubling picture of kids’ online lives. 96 percent of children aged 10 to 15 were using social media, and 70 percent had been exposed to harmful content, including misogyny, violence, and material promoting suicide and eating disorders. One in seven had been targeted by grooming behavior, and more than half reported being cyberbullied. The government cited these findings when introducing the ban, accusing social media platforms of promoting “design features that encourage [young people] to spend more time on screens” while pushing content that “can harm their health and wellbeing.” What the ban actually does Children under 16 can no longer create or maintain social media accounts across ten platforms, including TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, and Twitch. Existing accounts must be deactivated. However, kids can still watch most content passively as the ban only blocks interactive accounts. Interestingly, platforms like YouTube Kids, WhatsApp, and Google Classroom are exempt, as they don’t meet the criteria for being “social” in the legal sense. Online games such as Roblox and Discord are also excluded, though some have quietly added age-gating features. Who’s responsible—and what’s at stake The law doesn’t punish children or parents. Instead, the burden falls entirely on social media companies, who must take “reasonable steps” to keep under-16s off their platforms or face fines of up to A$49.5 million (about USD $32 million). To comply, companies must implement age assurance technology that goes beyond simple self-declared birthdays. That may include government ID checks, facial or voice recognition, or advanced algorithms that infer a user’s age based on online behavior. Companies like Meta and Snapchat are already adapting. Meta began removing teen accounts in early December, allowing wrongly flagged users to appeal using ID or video selfies. Snapchat offers age verification through bank accounts and photo IDs. Why critics say the policy is flawed Despite good intentions, critics worry the rollout may backfire. Facial recognition is notoriously unreliable for teens, and many fear the law will block adults by mistake while letting determined underage users slip through. Stephen Scheeler, a former Facebook executive, questioned the effectiveness of the fines. “It takes Meta about an hour and 52 minutes to make A$50 million in revenue,” he told AAP. Others point to loopholes: dating apps, gaming platforms, and AI chatbots, some of which have been flagged for predatory or sexually suggestive behavior, are not covered by the ban. Even teens themselves seem skeptical. Some admitted that they’re setting up fake accounts, switching to shared family profiles, or planning to use VPNs to mask their age and location. These are all tactics already used by kids in the UK after similar laws were enacted. Platform pushback and privacy concerns Tech companies weren’t shy about their frustration. YouTube’s parent company, Google, called the new law “rushed” and warned it may make kids less safe by removing access to safety tools built into accounts. Meta warned of “inconsistent protections” across apps. Critics also flagged the privacy implications of collecting biometric data and IDs to verify age, especially in a country where data breaches have exposed sensitive personal information in recent years. The government insists the legislation includes strong data protections: information collected can only be used for age verification and must be deleted immediately after. “It’s going to look untidy” Communications Minister Annika Wells admitted the rollout won’t be flawless. “It’s going to look a bit untidy on the way through,” she said. “Big reforms always do.” The government maintains that doing something is better than doing nothing, especially as global anxiety around kids’ digital safety grows. Denmark has announced a similar under-15 ban, France is debating a curfew for teens on social media, and Spain and Norway are exploring new restrictions. In the UK, companies now face major fines or even jail time for executives if they fail to prevent kids from accessing harmful content. In the U.S., efforts like Utah’s under-18 ban have been blocked in court. A test case for global policy Australia’s law is a bold experiment in regulating digital spaces for children. It’s messy, imperfect, and controversial, but it may also become a blueprint for countries grappling with how to raise kids in a hyperconnected world. The post Australia’s bold move to ban kids under 16 from social media sparks important global debate first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.