Millions of children and teens lose access to accounts as Australia's world-first social media ban begins

[mysteryowl]

Source: The Guardian/US

Accounts held by users under 16 must be removed on apps that include TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Kick, Twitch and Threads under ban.

Australia has enacted a world-first ban on social media for users aged under 16, causing millions of children and teenagers to lose access to their accounts.

Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Kick, Twitch and TikTok are expected to have taken steps from Wednesday to remove accounts held by users under 16 years of age in Australia, and prevent those teens from registering new accounts.

Platforms that do not comply risk fines of up to $49.5m.
[snip]
Polling has consistently shown that two-thirds of voters support raising the minimum age for social media to 16. The opposition, including leader Sussan Ley, have recently voiced alarm about the ban, despite waving the legislation through parliament and the former Liberal leader Peter Dutton championing it.

The ban has garnered worldwide attention, with several nations indicating they will adopt a ban of their own, including Malaysia, Denmark and Norway. The European Union passed a resolution to adopt similar restrictions, while a spokesperson for the British government told Reuters it was “closely monitoring Australia’s approach to age restrictions”.



Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/dec/09/australia-under-16-social-media-ban-begins-apps-listed

---

This is the kind of work that can be done when there is a functioning government.

[Blues Heron]

1. What about TV, video, movies music etc. ok to buy a cd?

The other side of this is now everybody has to show ID to use any of the listed apps.

[Violet_Crumble]

12. It doesn't affect anything but social media

What's app is okay. Reddit isn't. Streaming, group chats and anything else is fine.
And I haven't had to show any ID and heard platforms are using facial recognition.
The aim of this is to protect children from bullying and seeing disturbing and violent content. I totally support it as does around 80% of the population.

[Torchlight]

3. Well... that's just disappointing.

[LudwigPastorius]

4. Headline 2060:

Australia Becomes World's Only Superpower: Discoveries in medicine, unlimited renewable energy, quantum mechanics, and nanotechnology linked to a genius-level generation coming of age.

[littlemissmartypants]

5. Australia may become...

The only country that has a generation or more of citizens who aren't brainwashed and weak minded that can actually think.

[mysteryowl]

6. Just imagine...

Last edited Tue Dec 9, 2025, 06:31 PM - Edit history (1)

Kids will need to use an actual dictionary and encyclopedia.




Update, actually, they still can use the internet for most things like looking up spelling. It is just a ban on social media.

[groundloop]

8. The very same generation that isn't subject to mass school shootings

Australians had the spine to enact very strict gun laws, gun related homicides are rare.

[orangecrush]

10. THIS

[reACTIONary]

19. They will certainly levelup their tech skills....

.... learning how to circumvent the ban.

[reACTIONary]

7. This is the kind of work that can be done when there is a...

.... functioning, oppressive, authoritarian government.

[mysteryowl]

9. I disagree. It is only social media they are banned from.

They can still use the internet.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Huh?

There's nothing oppressive or authoritarian about the ALP. They're a centre-left government.

[reACTIONary]

16. Then why are they banning kids from ...

... the freedom to use social media? That is oppression in my mind, left of center or not.

[Violet_Crumble]

21. There's been a spate of suicides here..

You may not give a shit coz of 'freedum!* and a misuse of terms like authoritarian, but here in the real world where it's universally accepted that children can't just do what adults do, what yr saying is nonsense. Children in most countries have long been restricted in seeing or doing what adults can do. Do I need to spell out some obvious examples for you?

I'd be totally opposed to this if it was aimed at over 16s, but it's not. You should spend a bit of time reading up about this law and why it's happening instead of kneejerking like you have.

* I get sick of seeing Americans going on about freedom and not really understanding what it is. Rather than talking about it, we actually live it'

[reACTIONary]

26. My opinion is that...

... interacting with others, some unlike yourself, reading, seeing and learning about the world, and being able to express yourself are not the same as, for instance, drinking a beer or smoking out behind the barn. They are exercising the freedom of and development an individual conscious.

Freedom of conscious is not incidental or inconsequential for freedom in general. It is the root and trunk of freedom and all of our liberties are branches from it. I'm a liberal, and I am sure you know that liberal means, literally, of and related to liberty.

As far as a "spate of suicides" is concerned this is a standard trope of moral panics. The "scourge of social media" is just another moral panic. And moral panics are the bane of liberty.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. Sneaky smokes and beers were a thing when I was a kid...

But my parents didn't take me out and buy me beer and smokes. They would have been cranky parents if they'd known. The social media ban is nothing like that. Only a few platforms are affected, and there's child friendly alternatives available to them.

I think you have to understand that US culture is what you're using to react to something that isn't American. As a culture we don't really like Americanism being imported here, whether it's the rank stupidity of the US electoral system, or the selfish and greedy individualism of many Americans. I for one am bothered by children being able to see extreme violence and murders on Twitter or Youtube and if there was a better way to make sure teens don't see that, I'd be all for it. I can't imagine you want kids to see that either, but I don't understand what your solution would be.

Finally, if the term liberal can apply to Cookers and anti-vaxxers, then I'm not one. I thought it was a political term, so apologies.

As far as you claiming the spate of suicides is a standard trope, you are clearly misunderstanding what's driving this, which is understandable seeing yr not an Australian and don't appear to know much about this. What drove it wasn't moral panic, but a group of parents whose children had committed suicide after being bullied online. Surely you're not going to accuse them of being moral panickers, are you?

[reACTIONary]

32. My point is that beers and smokes...

... are not the same as ideas and talking to your friends about life. They are categorically different. So prohibiting kids from buying beer is not on point for prohibiting them from organizing a party on Facebook.

I am not against suicide prevention... I think it's great that they put nets up on the Golden Gate bridge. I'm all for help lines. But again, I think that is categorically different from banning kids from interacting with each other and learning more about the world.

Whether or not some specific group of parents are or are not "moral panickers," the fact of the matter is that such incidents and such groups can excite moral panics and that moral panics generally do not lead to reasoned deliberation and can be exploited by those who have, for want of a different characterization, illiberal intentions.

And I wonder why we don't hear more about kids who were diverted from suicide by engaging on social media. I know there are LBGQ+ kids who have been spared a lot of despair and loneliness by finding others like themselves on social media. Some have said they overcame suicidal ideation. There must be others besides them who have been helped by talking to a supportive community. But I guess if your kid doesn't commit suicide, you don't form a group and make everyone aware of it.

And, some of those illiberal parents who bully their LGBQ+ children who have found others online like them are all for a social media ban.

[reACTIONary]

17. Ah! I see! It's an "only"! I guess an "only" oppression....

.... isn't a "real" oppression.

BTW, picking on kids is a gateway drug to adult authoritarian addiction.

[cstanleytech]

11. I'm not a big fan of bans but if the evidence shows it works in those countries we should consider it.

I'd wait though until the evidence is definitely in to see if shows it's a positive or negative thing.

[The Mouth]

14. Censorship, or other control of media is never good

No governmental entity should have jack shit to say about what anyone watches. The *ONLY* people with any right to control in the slightest what someone reads, posts, forwards, or responds to are the parents of minors.

Censorship, any control of what anyone says, beyond the basics of libel, slander, and incitement to riot is bad. Anywhere, anytime, of anyone, for anyone, in any context, for any reason.

Censors suck, anybody should be able to view anything.

[Violet_Crumble]

23. No limits on child porn?

I mean, there should be no control over what we view, right?

[The Mouth]

33. That is evidence of a crime,.

That is evidence of a crime. Anyone creating it should be arrested and punished severely.

[Polybius]

15. Wonder what happens when these teens become voting age?

Will they hold it against the politicians that supported this?

[reACTIONary]

18. I sure hope so....

... the only upside to this is they might learn a lesson in resistance.

Maybe join those straw hat pirates!

[Violet_Crumble]

25. Some may, but in a really vague way.

It was a Bill that had almost unanimous support going through both houses of Parliament
Plus we'll know by the time the older cohort affected are old enough to vote whether it's worked or not. Any under-16 who is full of rage and just has to get on Twitter etc will likely exert a bit of energy bypassing things while they can, but holding a grudge and voting solely based on it is very unlikely..

[reACTIONary]

20. From the article, an example of good, liberal parenting...

Another parent said the ban had forced him to teach his child how to break the law. “I’ve shown her how VPNs work and other methods on bypassing age restrictions,” he said. “I’ve had to set her up with her own adult YouTube account and have assisted her in bypassing TikTok’s age-estimation and will keep doing so each time it asks.”

[Violet_Crumble]

22. Its parents like him who are responsible for this in the first pkace

No responsibility or control over what their kids are doing online. More than likely his little cherub needed to get back on to see if there any more kids from her school she could bully.

[reACTIONary]

24. Its parents like this....

... liberal parents, that are like me.

I never, ever, tried to exert any prohibitory control over what my son read, on line or off, watched, listened to, or video games played. And if we had such a ban, I certainly would have showed him how to circumvent it.

My son wasn't a bully, and I doubt she is either. My son was, and is, an upstanding, outstanding person who would never support or tolerate the denigration or oppression of others. That's what he learned from me.

[Violet_Crumble]

27. Why are you referring to them as liberal when politics has nothing to do with it?

Every parent of a bully insists their child isn't a bully, so who knows what yr child got up to when you were being into lack of prohibitive control parenting. I said no to some of things and set up some boundaries for my little poppet and she survived just fine, though we had one or two rocky moments when she was at school.. Yr child turned out well, but I think that the kid with the fucking wanker of a dad is more likely than not to be a bully. There's a big problem with online bullying here.

I think you and I won't agree for one main reason. You're approaching this from a rigid and absolute American cultural approach where freedom of speech and no censorship are up on a pedestal and to be worshipped without question or exemption. I come from a culture where the greater good is weighed up against an equally important freedom of speech. Things aren't always absolute here, and this is one case where it's really gained traction to try to reduce the harm to children. We'll have to wait to see how it goes and whether it does what's it's intended to do.

[reACTIONary]

29. I beg your pardon. My son is not and never has been a bully....

.... I know my son, and I know that for certain.

A liberal person, in the general sense, is a person with a generous spirit, tolerant of others, open minded and open to new experiences, and generally opposed to dogma and cant. A "liberal parent" is sometimes pejoratively called a "permissive parent."

I'm a liberal person, and a permissive parent. And hey, I even have a liberal arts degree!

Of course, liberality in the general sense does have political ramifications. But liberality is derivatively, not primarily, political.

[blubunyip]

31. The biggest difference between America and Australia

is that Australians still believe the government works for them, and responds to their concerns.

In America, it's everyone out for themselves and trust in government is very low.
--------------
Percent of the American public who say they trust the federal government:
Overall  
33%
Democrats  
31%
Republicans  
42%
Independents/don’t know
20%

I agree totally with what Violet Crumble is saying about this ban. Every word. It is something to try, since we are in a Brave New World of information corruption and lies and distortion, and without any parental control, too many young children are being asked to discern the value of what they see and experience online, often alone.

I'm American but I have lived in Australia. Australia is still a democracy. We are not. Americans today have no idea what the "freedom" that is touted really means. Our arrogance and entitlement is pervasive. We should wake up and learn something from others for a change.

[OC375]

30. Well Done Australia

Hoping it works out as intended.

[MichMan]

34. People praising Australia for this, yet when Texas banned porn sites for minors, they were generally ridiculed

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220437327

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143373875

[reACTIONary]

35. True, that. Good observation. I bet ...

... they would have gotten a lot of blow-back if they had tried that in Australia. Probably would not have gotten away with it.

[hunter]

36. Hell, other than DU, I've banned social media from my own personal universe.

Possibly because I'm a paranoid lunatic who really doesn't want vile mega-corporations watching me or leading me down the garden path into their political and consumerist dystopias.

I definitely wouldn't want that for my own children, but they were not of the social media generation. They just wanted simple cell phones in high school because "everybody has one!" By the time they got their own cell phones that wasn't entirely true. There were still a lot of parents in our neighborhood who couldn't afford cell phones for themselves, let alone their children.

[moondust]

37. I'll call it the MAP.

Murdoch Atonement Project

I don't know if Rupee has anything to do with it but...the country that gave us the creator of arguably the largest, most profitable propaganda operation in history looks like it is doing something to prevent vulnerable children from falling into the trap. If enforced it should give kids some time to learn about misinformation/disinformation/propaganda and build some defenses against them.