Australia bans "Social Media" for kids under the age of 16

It's not going to work but I'm fine with the attempt. You'll have the side that says just be better parents or whatever which isn't totally invalid but you're up against billions in marketing and social engineering and ultimately peer pressure. Agree it's a slippery slope but I don't think it's an issue that can be ignored.
But from what I hear the kids are already turning places like Yelp into social media replacements so I guess it's kind of the toothpaste is out of the tube already.

My daughter's snap reaction was "it won't work," but it's hard to dispute that social media is harming kids.

by coordi m

Seems like all reddit, twitter, facebook, instagram, and etc. Maybe 2p2 would count as a social media site?

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/12/9/why-is-australia-banning-social-media-for-teenagers

Al Jazeera

Why is Australia banning social media for teenagers?

Seems like this is the direction many countries are moving, with more and more restrictions on internet use for individuals. I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing for kids... See full post

didnt China do this like 10 years ago and the liberals called them authoritarian etc?

I'd say china was right and people should probably start gettting used to that phrase a lot in the future.

It certainly would be 'authoritarian' to ban social media for everyone.. That's not what is happening in Australia though.

I'm sure China banning Wikipedia for everyone was to protect the kids.

Sounds about right

It's a little hard for Americans to absorb that the relationship between citizens and the state is quite different in China than it is in a lot of the Western world. A good chunk of the West thinks of the state as existing almost entirely for the purpose of promoting the welfare of the citizens. Opinions in China about the relationship between citizens and the state vary, of course, but the idea that citizens play an important role in promoting the welfare of the state almost certainly is more common in China (and more aggressively encouraged by the government) than it is in, say, the U.S. As a result, I suspect that Chinese citizens find it less jarring for the government to aggressively implement measures that are intended to coerce people into behaving in a way that benefits the state.

Yeah I'm all for my country banning all social media for kids under the age of 16 and honestly probably older than that. I'd argue most adults shouldn't be on social media. Didn't think I'd ever find myself agreeing with it but it's a real cancer.

Have a 6 year old who I don't even allow on youtube and will keep away from social media for as long as I can.

In my experience, it isn't unusual for kids to say that kids spending too much time on social media is a problem, which is probably a good indication that it is, in fact, a problem.

Yeah hasn't affected me. I think Google analyses your account and can tell you are over 16. Kids are already finding ways to get around the facial recognition and with VPNs. The concern is that it will drive kids underground where they can't be detected when previously they could be. This would never happen in the US with how strong your 1st amendment is but here in Australia the government is a bit like the UK where they can say you have rights but strip them right back if they want to push other rights more stronger (i.e family - teen suicides etc). I definitely can understand from a schooling perspective where they are coming from as what happens between students at schools and the bullying and victimisation that occurs can really have detrimental effects on young people's mental health and ultimately their academic performances.

I don't think anyone expects such a ban to work perfectly, but you might get it to work decently. Making something a hassle can have a regulatory effect.

However, it is a rather weak and cowardly way to regulate social media. What should be instituted across liberal democracies is to greatly strengthen constitutional rights to privacy - both from private and state entities. Opt-out from corporate surveillance should be the default, and across a similar vein government surveillance should be curtailled - across many democracies it has spiraled out of control during the "war on terror".

That also has the added advantage of not being a regulation against expression, but rather being regulation against monitoring citizens without their consent.

And yes, this is a pipe-dream as long as big data and big tech has its hands on the levers of government, but that it is difficult or unrealistic does not make it wrong.

Data privacy also insane. Windows 11 is basically malware at this point.
Nice to see some European governments moving to foss solution ls.

Politics in 2+2 should be banned below IQ 100

Unfortunately, the EU also seems poised to go the route of surveilling the end user and monitor messages. Government, politicians and law enforcement is exempt from said proposals of course, because it is 2025 and the idea that government should be transparent and serve the citizenry is outdated.

With washoe gone, I suspect no current active posters would be banned under such a policy.

Yeah, that chat control stuff is also wild.

Honestly feels like the banning guns debate. Whether you believe it right or wrong, my overall takeaway is one of, "Well hey, at least they're trying to do something about it."

Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Billionaires also own the US govt so definitely this won't be a thing in America.