Australia is set to enact a sweeping new law next month that will bar children under the age of 16 from opening accounts on nine major social media platforms, including Reddit and Kick. This move, which takes effect on December 10, 2025, marks a world-first attempt to shield young people from what lawmakers and regulators describe as the growing risks of online social interaction. The law’s scope is broad, encompassing tech giants like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, Threads, and now the popular forum Reddit and livestreaming service Kick, according to statements from Australia’s eSafety Commissioner and Communications Minister Anika Wells.
"We have met with several of the social media platforms in the past month so that they understand there is no excuse for failure to implement this law," Wells told reporters in Canberra on November 5, 2025, as reported by the Associated Press. "Online platforms use technology to target children with chilling control. We are merely asking that they use that same technology to keep children safe online."
The stakes for noncompliance are high. Platforms that fail to take "reasonable steps" to ensure children under 16 cannot create or maintain accounts face fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars (about $33 million USD). The law, passed in November 2024, gave social media companies a year to prepare for these sweeping changes. According to Reuters, initial discussions centered on the biggest names—Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X, and YouTube—but the list has since grown to include Reddit, Kick, and Threads, reflecting the rapidly evolving digital landscape.
Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, who is responsible for enforcing the ban, emphasized that the list of age-restricted platforms will continue to evolve as technology changes. "Delaying children’s access to social media accounts gives them valuable time to learn and grow, free of the powerful, unseen forces of harmful and deceptive design features such as opaque algorithms and endless scroll," Inman Grant said, as reported by BBC News. She also noted that the government would collaborate with academics to evaluate the ban's impact, including whether children sleep or interact more, or become more physically active as a result of reduced online engagement. "We’ll also look for unintended consequences and we’ll be gathering evidence so others could learn from Australia’s achievements," she added.
The platforms targeted by the ban were selected because their "sole or significant purpose is to enable online social interaction," according to the eSafety Commissioner’s November 4 statement. Notably, messaging services like Discord and WhatsApp, gaming platforms such as Lego Play and Roblox, and educational tools like Google Classroom and YouTube Kids are not included in the restrictions. Teens under 16 will still be able to view YouTube videos, but they will not be permitted to have accounts—a requirement for uploading content or interacting on the platform. This change followed the government’s reversal of YouTube’s initial exemption, after it was identified as the most frequently cited platform where children aged 10 to 15 reported seeing harmful content.
Enforcement, however, remains a thorny issue. Critics have questioned how the law will be implemented, given that users cannot be "compelled" to submit government IDs for age verification, as noted in a government fact sheet cited by Reuters. Potential methods under consideration include official ID documents, parental approval, and even facial recognition technology. Yet, these strategies raise their own concerns—data privacy, the accuracy of age verification software, and the risk of inadvertently exposing children to less-regulated corners of the internet if they are forced off mainstream platforms.
Data privacy advocates and some mental health experts have voiced apprehensions about the new law. More than 140 Australian and international academics signed an open letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese last year, calling the age limit "too blunt an instrument to address risks effectively." They argue that the policy could undermine the privacy of all users, who may be required to prove their age, and potentially cut children off from valuable social connections. Some mental health advocates worry that the ban could push youngsters towards less-regulated or more dangerous online spaces, instead of addressing the underlying problems with platform content and design.
Minister Wells has responded to these concerns by stressing the government’s commitment to keeping user data as private as possible and reiterating that the law is about making a "meaningful difference," not achieving perfection. "We want children to have a childhood, and we want parents to have peace of mind," she said, as reported by Reuters. Polls suggest that most Australian adults support the ban, reflecting a growing societal anxiety about the impact of social media on young people’s mental health and wellbeing.
The international community is watching Australia’s approach closely. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told a United Nations forum in New York in September that she was "inspired" by Australia’s "common sense" move to legislate the age restriction, according to the Associated Press. Other nations grappling with similar concerns about children’s exposure to harmful online content may soon look to Australia’s experience as a blueprint—or cautionary tale.
The timing of Australia’s expanded ban coincides with mounting global scrutiny of social media platforms, particularly TikTok. French authorities recently opened an investigation into TikTok’s algorithms, citing concerns that they may push vulnerable young people toward suicide. Paris prosecutor Laure Beccuau said the probe was initiated after a parliamentary committee highlighted "insufficient moderation of TikTok, its ease of access by minors and its sophisticated algorithm, which could push vulnerable individuals towards suicide by quickly trapping them in a loop of dedicated content." TikTok has denied these allegations, telling AFP that it "categorically rejects the deceptive presentation" and that it is being made a "scapegoat" for broader societal issues.
Australia’s law is not without its critics at home. Some parents and young influencers have already taken action to avoid its consequences. For example, an Australian influencer family with millions of YouTube followers announced their decision to move to the UK so their 14-year-old daughter could continue creating online content. This underscores a tension at the heart of the new rules: while designed to protect, the law may also disrupt the lives and livelihoods of young people who have found creative or professional opportunities online.
As the December 10 deadline approaches, the world will be watching to see not only how Australia enforces its pioneering social media ban, but also how children, parents, platforms, and policymakers adapt to a new era of digital childhood. Whether the law will deliver on its promise to protect young Australians—or merely push the challenges elsewhere—remains to be seen.
