Will Australia succeed in its plans to ban minors from social media?

Australia is poised to implement a social-media ban for minors as the government grapples with mounting concerns over the impact of platforms like Instagram and TikTok on young people’s health. 

The proposed legislation would set a minimum age for social-media use, likely between 14 and 16, as part of the government’s push to address parental concerns. In the coming months, an age verification trial will precede formal legislation.

According to Qustodio’s research, in Australia, among children aged seven to nine, 57% own iPads. YouTube is the most popular app, used for an average of 91 minutes a day. Roblox is closely followed as the second most-used platform, with children spending over two hours daily. Additionally, 36% of this age group are on X (formerly Twitter), and 29% use Reddit.

Nearly half of those aged 10 to 12 have smartphones. Despite age restrictions, TikTok is used for about two hours daily, while Roblox remains the most popular app, with an average of 136 minutes spent per day. The use of X increases to 42% in this age group, which exposes them to potentially harmful content and communities, such as the "manosphere."

Spotify is the top app among teenagers aged 13 to 15, followed by Snapchat in fifth place. TikTok ranks among the top three apps, with over two hours of daily use, heavily influenced by its content recommendation algorithm.

Australia’s move mirrors those of other countries like China, which has introduced laws that minors would be restricted to at most three hours of online gaming a week and only ‘between 8pm and 9pm on Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays’.

Will Anstee, group chief executive of The Online Safety Agency, a company that advises brands on online safety and wellbeing of young digital users, tells Campaign that banning young people from social media platforms is often seen as inefficient, cumbersome, and expensive. 

He says that evidence suggests that the most effective approach involves regulating big tech and providing media literacy and digital wellbeing education to advertisers, media agencies, schools, and parents. Many of these stakeholders lack the understanding and tools to address the challenges of a hyper-digital world effectively.

“With any transformative change, it is crucial to look at all sides of the issue and reflect on how we can balance protection, education (organisations and schools), and parental and personal responsibility,” says Anstee. 

“While protecting kids from the harms of the online world is essential, we must ensure that the conversation doesn't push meaningful discussions underground and further complicate the job of parenting.”

Anstee adds that a global dialogue on platform accountability is essential to achieve meaningful change. He urges social-media platforms to assume greater responsibility for ensuring the safety of their users, particularly the youngest and most vulnerable. 

He suggests platforms should be incentivised to create safer online spaces tailored for younger users. Child-friendly versions of apps like YouTube Kids are positive examples of how social-media companies can adapt their offerings to provide safer environments. 

With proper regulation, these platforms could help balance children’s right to digital participation with robust safety mechanisms.

“It is important to recognise that legislation alone is not sufficient. While laws can provide a framework, true protection for children online will come from education, open dialogue, and collective accountability,” explains Antsee.

“Governments, tech companies, advertisers and educators must collaborate to create user-friendly online safety tools that help parents and children manage their digital experiences. Relying on parental controls is not enough; a systemic approach to online safety, underpinned by solid and enforceable laws and accessible, up-to-date, unbiased educational resources, is needed.”

Guy Jarvie, general manager for Australia and New Zealand at NP Digital, points out that children and teens are undeniably a core audience for many social media platforms and, consequently, for numerous brands that leverage these channels. A ban on underage users would result in the loss of this crucial segment, compelling platforms to shift their focus towards older demographics. 

This would necessitate a significant strategic overhaul for brands. Influencers and content creators who primarily engage younger users would also be heavily affected, facing a substantial decline in audience engagement. The challenge would extend beyond merely redirecting focus; it would also involve discovering new avenues that resonate as effectively with these younger audiences.

“We know that brands invest heavily in targeting younger demographics on social media, so a ban would undoubtedly cause a shake-up. Advertising budgets would need to be reallocated, and we’d likely see a shift towards other digital channels like YouTube, gaming platforms, or even more traditional media that still appeal to kids and teens,” says Jarvie.

“Social media platforms would have to adapt quickly, possibly by redefining their value proposition to brands. For us, it’s about staying nimble and finding those next best channels where the target audience is moving, ensuring our clients’ dollars continue to be well spent.”