Australia has always been ambitious. It comes from starting in the nose-bleed seats of the world stage until the coming-of-age realisation of kicking everyone off it and putting the spotlight on you.
That the audience found the irreverence and egalitarianism endearing, even if nobody understood a bloody word that was said wasn’t as surprising as discovering the smell of greasepaint as agreeable as eucalyptus leaves, lanolin and a freshly cleaned pub. From then on, we wrote ourselves into pretty much anything that was showing. We starred in the secret ballot system, women’s suffrage, worker’s rights, environmentalism, land rights and a bunch of inventions. The kind of things we’re proud of. All the shameful stuff, like the systemic ill-treatment of First Nations people, the myth of a classless society, and the lengthening list of extinct species, get the hook.
That all the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players was known for almost 200 years before convicts even knew Port Jackson. So you can’t blame Aussies for figuring that as a bona fide, ye olde licence to just take on the parts you like.
Starting in December 2025, and maybe to take the searing heat off the housing crisis and unprecedented bushfires and flooding, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, and other social media sites blanket banned all accounts for anyone under the age of 16.
Like the Hill’s Hoist and goon bags, no country has thought of implementing such a thing before. And like both these iconic items, knowing the effects in advance is impossible.
Nobody could have predicted the stratospheric rise in groundings and broken arms from swinging on what is clearly a piece of playground equipment under the guise of a clothesline. Or how easily a cardboard cask of wine could be wrapped like a gift, complete with a bow for a 15-year-old to smuggle into a party. These are Things Unknown until much later, when the family statute of limitations has passed more times than a joint at a mid ’70s concert.
Even years from now, it’ll be hard to assess the upshot of the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024.
In 1985 Aussie kids were Weet-Bix kids; in 2025 they’re guinea pigs. It fits the same tune though, which is comforting.
UK PM Keir Starmer’s staring at the whole experiment to see if what’s good for the goose down under will be good to expand to the grander gander. Its population of under-16s is double; so he’s no doubt expecting to see something happen in half the time. Like a quick wash. Which YouTube appliance repair technicians never recommend doing on a regular basis.
If you can look back on what was once designated a sweet age, you can verify that and come to your own conclusions. Any younger and you’ll have to wonder about it for a while, ask a 16-year-old, or decide it’s information that’s totally irrelevant to your life right now.
If anyone was actually capable of that, social media wouldn’t exist.
It’s possible a swathe of Aussie Gen Alphas are discovering what a VPN is, and how to use one. Conspiracists are keyboard carpel-tunnelling that VPN providers are lobbying for a global ban, which is as interesting as it is expected. This is what happens when people have too much time on their hands that would once have been otherwise engaged in woodwork or embroidery.
Or other worthwhile life skills to both enhance our experience of this planet, and pass on to their kids.
Like all teenagers behaving as they should by bucking whatever they can buck, for many it’s business as usual having already found their way around age estimation scans.
This may indeed cause such consternation for some that their monocle lands in their sherry, and a stern letter to the Department of Trade and Customs is dashed off at once.
What should be dumbfounding, are the comments by many parents (yes, across platforms) that are aptly reflected in this gem: “I was relying on the government to clean it up for the kids.”
Clearly, child rearing isn’t something that can be sufficiently handled outside Capital Hill, Canberra.
Inarguably, bans work 100% for those in favour of them.
This ban highlights everything that’s wrong with the internet. Comments like the one above highlight everything that’s wrong with 21st century parenting. Which seems to have more styles than a night at the Grammy’s and much substance as a group chat allows.
The digital oligarchy under which we are all willing servants, refuses to apply or concede to widely beneficial changes to algorithms and the self-perpetuating echo chamber effect. Absolutely everyone can do without that; not just the kids, who are going to be using it the day of their 16th birthday anyway. At least those who haven’t already worked around it will.
This focus on the negative impact of social media on kids is a MacGuffin: ultimately meaningless, completely interchangeable and driving the plot of this Truman Show we now live in, where the whole idea of being an adult is notional.
Age does not stop being blinded by misinformation and AI slop. There’s strong evidence that online platforms are significant enablers of radicalisation, bigotry and hatred and there’s little done about that. Social media has a hugely damaging effect on expectations within the usual parameters of life, love and looks. Its use is the second leading cause of disability among psychiatric disorders; along with almost 60% of adults reporting platform-related addiction, anxiety, depression, loneliness and body issues.
It’s very, very telling that a significant portion of executives and engineers involved in the development and creation of the technology have documented that they don’t let their kids anywhere near it, but an age-based ban doesn’t stop anything; it simply delays it.
Could be, that the government’s just giving enough space for an influx of newly-trained mental health professionals and therapists to deal with the unstoppable tsunami of imbalances that come with living the online life we don’t have.
That’s a facetious comment, for anyone considering earth-shattering TikTok material, or an explanation for their blocked and confused teen.
More than 4.7 million Aussie accounts have been been taken offline, but it doesn’t mean the ban is successful.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been quoted as saying that he deems its the success from three perspectives: “One is the feedback that we’ve had from parents saying, thank you for doing this; this has made a difference in our household,” he said.
“The second is from young people themselves. There’s a lot of younger people that I’ve spoken to who speak about, ‘gee, we wish that was in place when I was 13 or 14. It’s making a difference to my younger brother or sister’.
“And the third is the fact that in spite of some skepticism out there, it’s working and being replicated now around the world. It is something that is a source of Australian pride.”
If he’s actually spoken to “young people themselves” and they’re saying, “gee” then golly, that’s grouse. The name of the local milk bar this happened in, and what was on the jukebox would really help.
Keep in mind too, that to him, “younger people” can be in their 50s.
That the ban is being “replicated now around the world” is pollie-speak for it being under consideration in the UK, France and Spain. That’s hardly “around the world” – more precisely “in other parts of the world.” And only three. So Albo’s excited either by his own hubris, or being a geriatric newlywed.
As far as it being “a source of Australian pride” that’s actually Rosella Classic Tomato. There’s nothing to be proud of until the results are in, and there’s no due date on that.
It’s all well-meaning, but the root of the issue is having unregulated social media to begin with. Presumably, a blanket ban is the easier and cheaper option to monitoring social media content, or pretending to hold the likes of Meta Platforms, X and ByteDance accountable.
Equally, the ban and megacorp accountability are impossible to effectively enforce. The second, purely because nobody ever does. Irrefutably, billionaires don’t even take responsibility for their extraordinarily bad taste, so there’s that.
The blanket restriction shows there’s something being done, whether well deliberated or not.
There are loads of reasons the kids aren’t alright – and social media is just one of them. Putting the spotlight on that, to the exclusion of all other aspects is simply smoke and mirrors. A failing education system, increasing financial pressure on overworked and underpaid parents, fractured families and communities, and a future that’s more frightening than fulfilling are all off the hook.
There’s cautious optimism that the ban may deliver valuable benefits. Although it has to be said that if these kids had the personal social skills, connections, and sense of emotional safety that give impetus and meaning to their lives that this restriction is meant to provide, there’d be no need for it in the first place.
Exit stage right.