The Australian Government has announced it will introduce a minimum age for access to social media and other relevant digital platforms before the next election.
The government has not yet decided the age for the ban, although Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has confirmed they are looking at an age range between 14 and 16.
Australian experts responded to the plan this week, with some saying the ban could protect children from common concerns surrounding exploitation, physical activity, and unhealthy body standards.
Associate Professor Tauel Harper from Murdoch University said the decision makes some sense, considering the wealth of evidence that social media is harmful to people – especially teens, arguing that social media is “not designed to be safe”.
“There is plenty of evidence that excessive social media use has negative effects on mental health, body image, socialisation and sleep patterns,” he said.
But while experts all seem to acknowledge something needs to be done about social media’s negative effects on the health of children, they say an outright ban could do more harm than good.
Experts like Professor Lisa Given, Director of the Centre for Human-AI Information Environments and Professor at RMIT, said the calls for a ban are “premature” and “not supported by clear evidence of harms for young people.”
“Social media play a major role in all people’s lives, including connecting those who are isolated and marginalised, as well as educational purposes, including supporting mental health and wellbeing,” she said.
In particular, children from minority and marginalised communities, such as queer and trans kids, as well as neurodivergent young people, could be completely cut off from support systems, communities, and services that exist through social media.
Games and services that require a linked social media account would also be affected, cutting young people off from much more than just a few online profiles.
A range of experts also added the ban would impact connections with distant friends and relatives, and prevent children gaining knowledge that could help their parents use technology too.
In addition to concerns around the negative effects on children and their access to the wider online world, experts like Professor Tama Leaver, Professor of Internet Studies at Curtin University, have expressed concerns around the ‘cliff’ that will occur when teens are suddenly allowed to use social media when they come of age.
“Many commentators have said we deal with dangerous situations by adding regulation, such as putting fences around pools. Rightly so,” Professor Leaver said.
“What’s being proposed here is filling the pools with concrete, and then magically expecting older children to have figured out how to swim.
“If we vastly increase our national spending on digital literacy, everyone can learn to swim, and to deal with whatever digital waters they find themselves in the future.
“Today’s proposals for bans simply kick the problems that exist down the road to a few years later but solves nothing.”
But questions of effectiveness aside, many simply believe the ban will be impractical and unenforceable. For example, age verification measures currently available on sites that sell alcohol are easy to bypass simply by inputting an acceptable year of birth.
More sophisticated age verification methods, such as uploading an ID card, raise data privacy concerns and make social media sites even more enticing for hackers.
Professor Lelia Green from Edith Cowan University said that her research found teens are able to bypass digital restrictions in all kinds of ways, which might render these bans useless, and could even lead teens to be more secretive and isolated when using the internet.
"Teens interviewed in our research find ways to bypass digital restrictions at home and at school using VPNs or their parents’ IDs. Banning social media will push them to smaller, less regulated platforms, potentially making them targets for predators,” she said.
“Restricting access won't stop teens from engaging; it will make social media more enticing and high status.”
And this is already happening with other teen bans, added Associate Professor Toby Murray from the University of Melbourne.
“Just consider how many teens regularly vape despite those products being illegal to sell to under-18s,” he said.
Many experts have criticised the lack of young Australians' voices and priorities in these plans. But all this talk of children and social media use could be distracting us from the overarching problem: that social media needs regulation to protect the wellbeing of citizens, young and old; not just children.
The Australian Government has said they will hold “big tech” accountable, as these companies have a key responsibility for the safety of their users.
And while research associate Scarlett Smout from the University of Sydney said that it’s positive to see the Government placing the onus on social media companies to comply with the bans, she added they really should be looking at creating a better digital world for the entire population.
“It would be great to see the Government use its power to drive social media companies to make their platforms a healthier environment for everyone, not just holding off the age of first use,” she said.
Read the full AusSMC Expert Reaction here
This article originally appeared in Science Deadline, a weekly newsletter from the AusSMC. You are free to republish this story, in full, with appropriate credit.
Contact: Olivia Henry
Phone: +61 8 7120 8666
Email: info@smc.org.au