A teenager’s perspective on Australia’s social media ban for under-16s

ONIKA MULLER

Australia’s ban on social media for children under 16 — a world first — came into effect on December 10 and I am sure other countries are watching with keen interest.

Statistics indicate that 96% of 10- to 15-year-olds in Australia use social media and the ban is forcing them to either deactivate their accounts or set up new ones.

The measure targets 10 of the largest platforms, including TikTok, Alphabet’s YouTube and Meta’s Instagram and Facebook which were ordered to block children or face big fines.

The measure aims to protect teens from the negative impact of social media after a study conducted in 2025 of children ranging from the age of 10-15.

The study found that seven out of 10 children in that age group had been exposed to harmful content and cyber bullying and one out of seven reported the harmful acts.

This could pose a threat to a whole new generation of children.

A total of 68% of Australian parents are in favour of the ban as they believe it does protect children from harmful social media interactions for longer than what was previously the case from a normally legal point of view.

However, 34% of parents said they would “likely” aid their children in breaking the ban.

These parents believed that they, and not the government, should have the say on their children’s social media presence.

While I agree with this argument, I equally understand the point of view of 68% of parents who support the ban.

It is a known fact that many teens experience cyber bullying and other harmful acts on social media, but I believe that the ban is not the solution.

A ban is not sustainable solution to the teens’ problems; it only gives them a chance to find another option.

For example, when high schools banned the use of cellphones by pupils on the premises, pupils still found ways to see how long they could keep phones at school or continue using them before getting caught.

That suggests that the bans are encouraging risk-taking and deceitful behaviour among children.

I understand the good intentions behind the ban; however, as a teenager who has had a social media presence, I can see more cons than pros.

I have seen countless examples on TikTok of ways for Australian children to continue using social media despite the ban.

This shows the immediate attraction of risk-taking behaviour.

Children barely benefit from the ban because they cannot gain a sense of social media responsibility.

And once they are finally given access at the age of 16 they have to navigate the immediate culture shock of a fast-paced social media stream at the most emotional time of their lives without being properly equipped for it.

Parents could also see this as an “out” when it comes to parenting, because if the social media age is delayed by a few years they will continue to put it off until it is too late.

But even if they do warn their children about the dangers of social media while they are young, they will not be able to understand the intensity of social media as they may not be on the same apps their children would use. That would cause a lack of preparation for both children and the parents.

Some advantages of the ban could be that teens already have a sense of self and direction, and they could have a good sense of what real friendships and relationships can look like.

This is a big positive, especially considering the world is always uncertain, with or without social media. But it is not guaranteed.

I believe that the social media ban comes with both advantages and disadvantages.

It should be considered from a perspective of young people rather than adults who have careers and higher social standing in the world.

Onika Muller is a high school pupil in East London.