More than 5.5 lakh social media accounts were blocked by Meta in the initial days of Australia’s landmark law prohibiting children under the age of 16 from accessing major social media platforms, marking the first major test of one of the world’s strictest digital safety regimes. The new legislation, which came into effect in December, requires leading platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and Threads to prevent Australian users below 16 years from holding accounts, a move that has drawn global attention and sparked intense debate.
According to Meta, the company blocked 330,639 accounts on Instagram, 173,497 on Facebook and 39,916 on Threads within the first week of complying with the law. The enforcement figures were disclosed in a blog post, as Australia became the first jurisdiction globally to introduce a blanket age-based ban on social media use for minors without allowing exemptions based on parental consent.
The Australian government and child safety campaigners have defended the policy as a necessary intervention to shield children from harmful online content, addictive algorithms and social pressures associated with social media use. They argue that existing self-regulation by platforms has failed to adequately protect young users, necessitating a more direct and enforceable approach.
While Meta has acknowledged the need to improve online safety for young people, the company has reiterated its opposition to blanket bans. In its statement, Meta urged the Australian government to engage more closely with the technology industry to explore alternative solutions. It suggested that age verification should be handled at the app store or operating system level, rather than by individual platforms, arguing this would ensure consistent protections across apps while reducing compliance burdens for both companies and regulators.
Meta also renewed its call for parental approval exemptions, stating that such provisions would allow families to make informed decisions while maintaining safeguards. The company warned that without a coordinated industry-wide framework, young users may simply migrate to newer or less regulated platforms, creating a “whack-a-mole” problem that undermines the law’s intent.
Australia’s approach stands out internationally. While other governments, including the US state of Florida and authorities within the European Union, have introduced measures to limit children’s access to social media, none have imposed an outright ban at the age of 16 without parental consent. This has made Australia’s law a reference point for policymakers worldwide. In the United Kingdom, the Conservative Party has indicated it would consider similar legislation if it returns to power, reflecting the growing political momentum behind stricter digital regulations.
Public response within Australia has been largely supportive, particularly among parents who see the ban as a long-overdue step to curb excessive screen time and exposure to harmful content. However, the policy has also faced criticism from digital rights groups, mental health advocates and young people themselves. Some experts have warned that the ban may be relatively easy to circumvent through false age declarations or technological workarounds, raising questions about its long-term effectiveness.
Others have expressed concern that restricting access could push children towards less moderated online spaces, potentially exposing them to greater risks. Young people from LGBTQ+, neurodivergent and rural communities have argued that social media plays a vital role in connection, identity formation and access to support networks, and that the ban could leave them more isolated and less prepared to navigate the online world safely.
As Australia continues to implement and enforce the law, its impact will be closely watched by governments, technology companies and child welfare advocates across the globe, with the debate highlighting the challenge of balancing child protection, digital inclusion and freedom in an increasingly connected world.
