Is austraila banning the internet for under 16y olds?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Australia has enacted and begun enforcing a world‑first law that requires major social platforms to prevent Australians under 16 from having accounts; the law took effect on 10 December 2025 and affected platforms include Instagram, Facebook, X, YouTube, Snapchat, TikTok, Reddit, Twitch, Kick and Threads, with non‑compliant companies facing fines up to about A$49.5–50 million [1] [2] [3] [4]. Governments, child‑safety advocates and tech companies disagree sharply on efficacy, privacy risks and likely circumvention by teens [5] [4] [2].
1. What the law actually does — a legal age floor for certain social platforms
The Online Safety Amendment creates a 16‑year minimum age for accounts on services the government designates as “age‑restricted social media platforms”; from 10 December 2025 those named platforms must take “reasonable steps” to stop Australians under 16 creating or keeping accounts or face civil penalties of up to roughly A$49.5–50 million [1] [3] [6].
2. Which apps are in scope — big names and a changing list
The government and eSafety identified major global platforms as the initial targets — Meta’s services (Facebook, Instagram, Threads), X, TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Twitch and Kick are among those listed — but the rules allow the minister to add or remove services, and the precise list has evolved during implementation [2] [7] [8].
3. How companies are trying to comply — age checks, IDs and inference
Platforms told regulators they would use a mix of methods: asking for identity documents, live face scans or video selfies, linking to payment details, and automated behavioural inference to estimate age. Regulators flagged that companies must be “good enough” at identifying under‑16s to show they made reasonable efforts, even though the techniques raise privacy and accuracy concerns [8] [4] [5].
4. Supporters’ case — child welfare and prevention
The Albanese government and child‑safety advocates argue delaying social media access until 16 will protect young people during critical developmental years, reduce exposure to harmful content and give time to build resilience; the government cites studies showing high use and exposure among younger teens to justify the policy [6] [5] [3].
5. Critics’ case — practicality, privacy and displacement
Tech companies, free‑speech and privacy advocates and some experts warned the ban is hard to enforce, will prompt circumvention (fake ages, VPNs or migration to less regulated services), and could force teens into darker corners of the internet or create intrusive verification regimes with privacy trade‑offs [5] [4] [9].
6. Early implementation realities — messy but consequential
Implementation began in early December 2025 with some companies proactively locking accounts: Meta started removing under‑16 users from 4 December and allowed verification paths for mistakes; eSafety acknowledged teething problems like some teens passing facial age‑checks and stressed it does not expect perfection on day one [8] [2] [5].
7. International significance — a test case
Observers say Australia is the first country to enforce such a ban and that other governments are watching closely; several countries have considered related approaches but details differ, so Australia’s practical outcomes will likely shape future debates abroad [4] [5].
8. What this means for families and teens now
Under‑16s “ordinarily resident” in Australia cannot make or keep accounts on designated platforms; they may still view some public content (for example some YouTube content) but lose posting, messaging and commenting privileges, and exemptions (like messaging apps, gaming platforms or education services) were carved out in the rules [10] [1] [6].
9. Limits of current reporting and open questions
Available sources show the law’s scope, penalties and initial company responses, but do not provide definitive statistics yet on how many accounts were removed, the effectiveness of different verification methods over time, or long‑term impacts on child wellbeing — those outcomes remain to be measured as the law is enforced (not found in current reporting; [2]; p1_s6).
10. Bottom line — not a total “internet ban,” but a tightly targeted social media restriction
Australia is not “banning the internet” for under‑16s; it is legally requiring certain social platforms to prevent under‑16 Australians from holding accounts and to take enforceable steps to do so, with heavy fines for failure — a regulatory experiment that balances child‑safety aims against practicality, privacy and displacement risks and will be watched internationally [1] [3] [4].