Australia’s new nationwide ban on social media accounts for children under 16 has officially kicked in, cutting millions of teens and preteens off from platforms like Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat and Facebook and instantly turning the country into a test case for the rest of the world.
Under the law, which took effect Wednesday local time, social platforms must take reasonable steps to stop under-16s from having accounts or face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars (about $33 million).
The requirement applies to age-restricted social media platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, X, Snapchat, YouTube and Reddit, and puts the legal responsibility on companies rather than kids or their parents.
Anthony Albanese, the country’s prime minister and his administration have framed the measure as a “social media delay,” not a criminal ban on teenagers themselves, meant to reduce exposure to cyberbullying, graphic content and design features that keep kids endlessly scrolling.
‘How am I supposed to talk to my friends?’ Kids react
For many teenagers, the new rules landed right as Australia heads into the long summer holidays. Fifteen-year-old Riley Allen, who lives in a remote part of South Australia, told The Associated Press he worries about losing touch with friends when in-person hangouts are difficult and group chats are suddenly gone.
That tension is playing out in homes and classrooms. Some teens say they’re angry and blindsided, complaining on news programs that their social life lives are on Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat.
Others say they’re curious what life will feel like without constant notifications, and a few have described it as a forced digital detox they might secretly need.
Workarounds started almost immediately. The Associated Press noted that some under-16s are likely to try bypassing age checks with fake birthdays, VPNs or shared family accounts — sometimes with help from parents who quietly oppose the law but don’t want their kids completely cut off.
At the same time, mental-health advocates and some young people worry that bans like this could hit marginalized teens the hardest — especially those who rely on online communities for support around mental health, disability or identity when they don’t feel safe opening up offline, per USA Today.
In a video message to teens that will be broadcast to classrooms throughout the country, Albanese urged them to see the change as a chance to pick up a book, learn an instrument or try a new sport — and to spend more time face-to-face with family and friends.
Who is against the ban? Tech companies, free-speech groups and some academics
The pushback has been loud and varied.
The Verge reported that tech companies have criticized the law as overreach and a threat to privacy, especially because it could require additional age-verification tools such as ID checks or selfie analysis. X, largely considered to have the most adult content on its platform, has been the most openly resistant, describing the policy as an attempt to “control the internet” and warning it may restrict free expression.
Reddit released a statement which argued it functions more as a pseudonymous discussion forum than a typical social network, called the law “legally erroneous” and “arbitrary” — but has said it will comply while still reserving the right to challenge the rules.
According to The Associated Press, two 15-year-olds, backed by the Digital Freedom Project, have launched a High Court challenge claiming the law violates Australia’s implied constitutional freedom of political communication and unfairly shuts teens out of public debate happening on social platforms.
More than 140 academics and experts released a statement arguing that a blanket age ban is a “blunt instrument” that may push kids toward less regulated corners of the internet rather than making them safer.
Politically, the law passed with support from the major parties, but was opposed by the Greens and several crossbenchers, along with at least one Liberal senator who broke ranks to vote no.
Who is backing it? Parents, child-safety advocates and most voters
Despite vocal criticism from the tech sector, the policy appears broadly popular with the Australian public. Recent polling reported by The Sydney Morning Herald shows roughly two-thirds of voters support the move to keep under-16s off mainstream social media platforms.
According to The Associated Press, other parents say they feel relief and even gratitude, saying the law gives them backup in battles over screen time and removes some of the pressure their kids feel to constantly post and compare.
The government has also found support from organizations like 36Months, which campaigns for delaying social media until at least age 16 and says constantly refreshed feeds are “rewiring young brains.”
Australia’s eSafety office emphasizes that the law does not fine or criminalize children or their caregivers. Instead, it threatens civil penalties for platforms that fail to take reasonable steps to keep under-16s from having accounts.
A global test case
Because this is the first nationwide ban of its kind, governments around the world are watching closely. Officials in countries including Denmark and Malaysia have already signaled interest in similar restrictions, while U.S. lawmakers continue to debate their own “kids off social media” proposals.
Utah was the first state to pass a social media law regulating use for minors. Currently, the law is unable to be enforced due to lawsuits. Last week at Utah’s AI Summit, Margaret Busse, executive director of the Utah Commerce Department, told participants that “We’re being sued, … (and) we’re also suing them. We’re suing Snap and we’re suing TikTok.”
For now, though, millions of Australian teens are the first ones living the experiment — some grieving deleted accounts, some quietly relieved, and many simply trying to figure out what life looks like when the scroll stops.