Social Media Ban: UNSW Experts Comment

The Australian Government’s new restrictions preventing people under 16 from accessing social media platforms will come into effect on 10 December 2025. The changes require platforms to implement age-verification measures and enforce minimum age requirements. 

On the technical, social, economic and policy considerations of the new rules, here are brief comments from UNSW Sydney experts.

Professor Barney Tan, Head of School, School of Information Systems and Technology Management, UNSW Business School, says:

“A nationwide ban preventing all under-16s from holding social media accounts is among the first of its kind globally – and as far as we know, the most sweeping such law in any democracy. We should ask why Australia is adopting a measure this extreme, when evidence about long-term benefit remains unclear. Rather than imposing blanket exclusion on an entire generation, we should prioritise balanced, evidence-based alternatives: parental consent, digital literacy and robust platform safeguards that protect young people, without stripping away their rights to connect, express themselves or participate in online society” 

Associate Professor Eric Lim, School of Information Systems and Technology Management, UNSW Business School,  says that:

“The Social Media Ban is a horrendous idea that impinges on the rights of people in a democratic society to have freedom to information. While I don’t deny that there are problems with social media and children accessing them, to put a blanket ban on this problem is just lazy and also hints at the contempt the government has of its constituents to make good decisions for themselves and for their family. This speaks of a failure on so many levels.” 

Professor Gigi Foster, School of Economics, UNSW Business, says:

“The U16 social media ban is a bad idea, for a number of reasons. Most importantly, there are far more effective, cheaper, and less intrusive ways to guide children in the appropriate use of social media. I predict that the upcoming ban will be ineffective and unworkable due to the ability of users who really want to get around it (e.g., using VPNs or AI-assisted proof-of-age fakes) and the extra cost/obligation of age verification that falls on companies’ shoulders but delivers no actual economic benefit. Beyond the fact that the approach embodied in this bill remains unproven as a means of actually protecting children from dangerous online content, I fundamentally disagree with the approach of limiting access to information in a country that is supposed to allow free speech. Inevitably, Australians who are older than 16 will find their access to communication platforms and information to be interrupted by interventions put in place because of this ill-conceived bill. Finally, collecting even more sensitive information about citizens (e.g., facial images, passport photos, etc – whatever is used to verify age) in the repositories of social media companies is just asking for more hacking and abuse. If I didn’t know better, I’d be tempted to view this as a soft launch of a mandatory digital ID – also a very bad idea.” 

Associate Professor Zixiu Guo, School of Information Systems and Technology Management, UNSW Business School, says that:

“As a mum of two, a lecturer for more than 30 years of experience, and a researcher deeply committed to understand how the technology can be designed to make the world a better place, I do worry about this generation a lot, including their physical and mental health, their education, and their futures since the world has become completely different from the one we knew, and the challenges they face are unlike anything we experienced. Although I know this ban may not be the ideal solution to fix the problems we are facing, it may at least prompt everyone affected to reflect on why social media has developed into what it is today, and what we should do about it. This kind of reflection is necessary for everyone, because this generation has never experienced what life was like before social media. At the very least, they may begin to pause, compare, and question their own life and their own habit, and perhaps, through this process, they will start making better, more conscious choices. In chaotic situations, we should act first to stabilise the situation, then observe what happens, and then respond accordingly. I think this is the right decision to be made.” 

Dr Sabrina Caldwell, Senior Lecturer, School of Systems & Computing, UNSW Canberra, predicts:

“It won’t work perfectly, but it can work imperfectly. Some young people will find ways to circumvent the restrictions. However, even if they find a way to sneak online, they will not find most of their peers there, and this will detract significantly from the social media experience.” 

Professor Michael Salter, School of Social Sciences, Arts, Design & Architecture, says:

“The ban is an unfortunate but necessary step to protect children from escalating levels of online sexual abuse and exploitation. Globally, 300 million children experience online sexual abuse each year, and the majority of this occurs on social media platforms. Social media companies have consistently prioritised growth and engagement over child protection. Age restrictions are a necessary circuit breaker for a sector where voluntary industry action has failed.” 

Dr Rahat Masood, Senior Lecturer, School of Computer Science and Engineering, suggests that:

 “There’s still a lack of clarity on how the government plans to audit social media companies on whether they’ve complied with the guidelines. Protecting children online is crucial but we also need to ensure the solutions don’t create bigger risks in the process.” 

Dr Hammond Pearce, Senior Lecturer, School of Computer Science and Engineering, says that:

“The privacy of the end-users is essential to get right – poorly implemented age verification systems are a huge risk for Australian social media users.”