On day one of Australia’s social media ban, my 13-year-old son said the most unexpected thing.<\/p>\n
“It’s a good start \u2014 but it doesn’t go far enough.”<\/p>\n
This from the kid who, like so many of his peers, had been rolling his eyes at the “lame” attempts by the federal government to restrict what has become open access by predators to kids on almost every social media and messaging site.<\/p>\n
We are three days in now from Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Kick, Twitch and TikTok being required to remove accounts held by users under 16 years of age in Australia and prevent those teens from registering new accounts.<\/p>\n
Platforms that do not comply risk fines of up to $49.5m.<\/p>\n
Loading…A relief to any parent<\/p>\n
The kids are not restricted from viewing content on sites like YouTube, but they can’t sign up for their own accounts until they are 16.<\/p>\n
Highly criticised online gaming platforms like Roblox<\/a> are also required to implement facial age assurance tests, and my son noted that this was in place and was smartly executed. Chat restrictions were immediately obvious.<\/p>\n This can only be a relief to any parent, even to the ones whose younger teens are anguished at being locked out of their preferred messaging platforms.<\/p>\n The day the snap streaks ended \u2014 for some teens, at least<\/a><\/p>\n After a year of waiting, Australia’s world-leading laws to block kids from accessing social media are officially enacted. But the teens they’re meant to impact say not much has actually changed.<\/p>\n But parental responses have been as varied as their kids are furious. Some parents have gone on the record saying they will help out their kids with VPNs and fake accounts, so their kids aren’t “left out”. Lesser-known messaging services are being downloaded by kids, and possibly parents, to link them in with a hyper-connected world they can no longer imagine doing without.<\/p>\n I understand the impulse. Teens are impressive advocates for their causes.<\/p>\n But, despite my own scepticism over the effectiveness of this law, it’s been heartening to see young teens respond warmly to what is a positive statement of protection and care \u2014 and I think we underestimate the force of that.<\/p>\n The power of the loving boundary<\/p>\n From infancy, parents are told about the importance of attachment and presence: of ensuring that a child knows its needs are seen and will be met, and that being around their parents is safe. Because our teens are mouthy, critical and opinionated young souls yearning to be free of our boundaries I think we can underestimate the central nervous system calming that comes with knowing that boundaries, even resented ones, are being placed with care and safety around the kids we love.<\/p>\n Sign up for Weekend Reads in your inbox<\/a><\/p>\n Start your weekend with the best of the ABC’s journalism, presented by Virginia Trioli. Discover compelling features, big ideas and revealing analysis to understand the stories that matter to Australians.<\/p>\n Grace Tame gets it. The steely former Australian of the Year, author and child sex abuse victim advocate posted to Instagram when the law came into place, noting that the internet gave direct access to children and that “child sex offenders are usually the earliest adopters of new technologies, which they repurpose for harm”.<\/p>\n Anything we can do to restrict access is important, she says.<\/p>\n This is where we parents should remind ourselves of the power of the loving boundary: not to bind and constrain, but to properly demonstrate that we hold our kids and their safety in our mind, and that they do not slip out of our mind.<\/p>\n And that’s what this might just turn out to be. Not a watertight seal of safety against predators. Nor an onerous restriction of business of the tech giants. But a good first step.<\/p>\n Keep an eye on the shortcuts<\/p>\n Jonathan Haidt, the author of the book The Anxious Generation, and a powerful critic of young people having access to phones, is a huge fan of the change. He calls it “the most vital law on the planet” and says it doesn’t matter if the rollout is messy and imperfect \u2014 “the alternative is far worse. Without action we leave yet another generation to grow up under the rule of a handful of tech companies whose business models depend on capturing as much of children’s time and attention as possible.”<\/p>\n In this household we will try to keep an eye on the shortcuts, contain the resentments and, probably most important of all, try to lead by example by putting our phones away, turning off the messages and reconnecting in the most essential and powerful way: in person.<\/p>\n This weekend, we’re joining post-natal mums to the ban, too \u2014 have a look at the research<\/a> on what screens postpartum can do to an under-slept mum.<\/p>\n What to read this weekend:<\/p>\n The 50 best albums of 2025: Your ultimate year-end music guide<\/a><\/p>\n How pregnancy is being criminalised in post-Roe America<\/a><\/p>\n We examined MPs’ family travel spending \u2014 here’s what we learned<\/a><\/p>\n Dancing gorilla wins funniest wildlife photo of the year<\/a><\/p>\n Should you go screen-free after giving birth? These mums share their stories<\/a><\/p>\n How to support your child through the social media ban<\/a><\/p>\n