Overdue reform or a knee-jerk reaction? Experts and teens are weighing in on Australia’s social media ban.
Article by:
Media Assistant
In a world-first, the Australian government has pushed through a social media ban for children aged 16 and under.
Despite many Australians being in favour of the ban, advocacy groups and experts are in opposition to the move, saying not enough thought has gone into it.
Founder of 6 News, 17-year-old Leo Puglisi, and Associate Professor Faith Gordon from The Australian National University (ANU) shared their views on the ban with Professor Mark Kenny on the Democracy Sausage podcast.
The bill aims to address the harmful impacts of social media on children and protect users under the age of 16.
Puglisi was just 11 when he started 6 News as a YouTube channel in 2019. It has since expanded to social media platforms including TikTok, X, Instagram and Facebook.
Puglisi acknowledges that if the ban was in effect a few years ago, his successful news platform would no longer exist.
“We’ve been able to grow as other young people who are passionate about media and journalism have seen our work,” he says.
“We want to be able to continue to grow and to have young people as part of this team. That wouldn’t be possible with this ban in place today.”
Both Gordon and Puglisi warn of the consequences of having minimal consultation from a diverse range of experts and young Australians prior to the passage of the bill.
“No one will deny that there are harms that can come with being online, but we also know there are many, many benefits,” Gordon says.
“To cut them off from that space really does deny them access to important information. This is a really knee-jerk reaction by the Federal Government.
“In this wider policy debate, we have been hearing a lot from psychologists, but not a lot of diversity from other experts who are researching in the area how this is all going to operate practically in the households of everyday Australians remains to be seen.”
Puglisi agrees we didn’t hear enough from people in his peer group prior to the passing of the legislation.
“We just have not had enough consultation with young people. And even if they’re going to be doing it over the next four months, I don’t think that’s good enough, because they’ve passed the legislation. You have to do this consultation before you do that,” Puglisi says.
“Ironically, you have to reach on people where they are, which [for young people] is social media.”
Gordon adds that the Federal Government announced the ban and passed the legislation before the Joint Select Committee’s report was released.
“From a policymaking and law-making perspective, the Australian government really jumped the gun on this,” she says.
“They hadn’t finished the age verification and age assurance trail.”
Gordon instead argues for social media platforms to have an enforced duty of care.
As countries from around the globe consider imposing a social media ban, the effectiveness of the ban in Australia will be watched closely.
Top image: A range of social media apps that will be banned for children under 16 next year. Photo: Primakov/shutterstock.com
A social media ban for children under the age of 16 is too blunt an instrument to effectively address all of the issues relating to online harm, according to an ANU expert.
The Coalition has released the costing of its nuclear energy plan – how does it compare with Labor’s renewables-only energy plan?
As Trump returns to the Oval Office, we’re going to see headlines on tariffs. Here’s what it means for the US, Australia and the global economy.