The legislation, introduced in parliament, has been described as “world-leading” by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, aiming to protect children from social media’s harms. It includes penalties of up to A$50 million for tech companies that fail to comply, though messaging services, gaming sites, and platforms like YouTube remain exempt.
James, a 12-year-old Australian boy, recalls a frightening incident on Snapchat that made him question the safety of going to school. After a disagreement with a friend, he was added to a group chat with two older teenagers one evening. What followed was a barrage of violent messages.
“One of them sounded about 17,” James told the media. “He sent videos of himself waving a machete and left voice messages threatening to stab me.”
James, whose name has been changed for privacy, joined Snapchat at age 10 after a friend encouraged their group to use it. However, after reporting the cyberbullying incident to his parents, which his school eventually resolved, James decided to delete his account.
His mother, Emma (also using a pseudonym), sees the ordeal as a stark example of why the Australian government’s proposed ban on social media for children under 16 is necessary.
Critics argue the proposed ban is impractical and could push children toward unregulated corners of the internet. Experts, including eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, have raised concerns about its feasibility and whether banning social media is the best approach.
Inman Grant highlighted that while social media can have risks, it also provides vulnerable groups—such as LGBTQ+ or First Nations teens—a sense of belonging. Instead of a ban, she advocates for educating children on safe digital practices and urging tech companies to improve platform safety.
Some parents, however, believe in prioritizing offline experiences. Emma argues, “Shouldn’t we allow kids to just be kids and learn social skills outside, rather than navigate these difficult systems so young?”
The debate also extends to enforcement challenges. Implementing age-verification technology raises privacy and feasibility concerns, with critics skeptical about its effectiveness.
Australia is not alone in attempting such measures. Similar efforts in South Korea, France, and the US have faced obstacles, including backlash and legal challenges. Albanese acknowledges the limitations but believes the legislation is a necessary step.
For parents like Emma, the proposal sends a powerful message, addressing the dilemma many face between giving their child access to potentially addictive platforms or risking their social isolation.
Since leaving Snapchat, James has spent more time outdoors with friends and hopes the new laws will encourage more kids to focus on real-world activities instead of online pressures.
