Recently, Australia passed a law banning children under the age of 16 from using social media, making it the strictest of such laws in the world. The Australian government believes this law will support parents in protecting their children from the potential harms of social media, such as addiction, privacy issues, and exposure to inappropriate content. But what do kids themselves think about this move? We asked teenagers around the world about their opinion. Here are their responses.
A ban too harsh or just about right?
Some teens see the ban as a step too far, arguing that social media is an essential part of their lives. “Social media is a huge part of teen culture,” says Sergei, 16, from Estonia. “Banning it would isolate us from the global internet culture and limit how we express ourselves.” He believes that although the ban may make socializing online harder, teens will still find ways to get around it. “They’ll just use VPNs, and the ban will fail to achieve its goal.”
Others, like 12-year-old Luna from the Netherlands, share similar doubts pointing out that age restrictions can be easily bypassed. “It probably won’t work because you can just say you were born in 2002 and download the app anyway,” she said. For her, such a ban seems impractical and unlikely to deter young users.
This scepticism extends beyond practical enforcement. “It’s not a problem of the internet, it’s a problem of society,” said 16-year-old Peter from the UK. He argued that the ban addresses symptoms, not causes, of social media-related issues. While he believes social media can amplify certain problems, Peter feels that banning social media won’t change society’s issues. “Information will always find a way to get out there, whether it’s through the internet or other channels,” he explains. “We’re not solving the real problem, which is how society handles things like privacy and addiction.”
Still, some teens believed the idea had merit. 20-year-old Sam from the Netherlands supported the age limit in theory, explaining that “kids who engage with social media at a young age can become insecure and develop unrealistic standards.” However, he acknowledged that enforcing the law would be a major challenge.
Vik, 16, from Lithuania, thinks the idea of a social media ban for minors could be a good one, but with some reservations. “Teenagers use social media to connect with friends and share their art,” she says. “It’s important to have those connections. Banning all social media would just make the situation worse.“
While some teens support the intention behind the ban, they feel the age limit is too high. “Setting the age limit at 16 is too high,” says a teen, 16, from the Netherlands. “12 would be more reasonable.” Besides, he adds, enforcing such a ban would be challenging. “Policing it will be difficult. It mostly depends on parents and how they handle screen time.”
“Managing social media use becomes easier with age,” shared 16-year-old Lily from the Netherlands. “But waiting until 16 feels unnecessary. Starting at 13, like in the US*, makes more sense.” She highlighted that teens need to develop social media skills gradually and responsibly rather than being introduced to it all at once at an older age.
Responsibility of parents or governments
A recurring theme in teens’ responses was the question of who should regulate social media use—parents or governments. Many felt strongly that the responsibility lies with families. “It should be up to the parents to decide, not the government,” said 16-year-old Peter from the UK, highlighting concerns about overreach and the role of parental guidance in setting boundaries.
A 16-year-old girl from the Netherlands emphasized that children should learn how to handle social media properly under their parents’ supervision. “It’s the parents’ responsibility to make sure their child isn’t spending too much time on TikTok or similar platforms,” she said, stressing that families have a better understanding of their child’s needs and habits than a government. She also suggests setting limits, such as screen time restrictions, to help control the amount of time spent online.
Another teen from the Netherlands suggested that instead of an outright ban, parents could set limits. He proposed measures like time restrictions, which families could oversee. “Policing it will mostly depend on the parents,” he argued, adding that age-appropriate conversations and clear expectations from parents could have a longer-lasting impact.
A part of teen’s identity
For many teens, the ban risks alienating them from a crucial part of their identity, they see social media as an integral part of teen culture. Banning it could isolate young people from global conversations. Vik, 16, from Lithuania emphasizes the importance of social media for creative expression and connecting with peers: “There are a lot of teens who use social media to chat about their interests (movies, video games, etc.). They might feel lonely without the ability to communicate with people who share the same hobbies”.
Others saw a potential silver lining. 15-year-old Nikita from the Netherlands believed the ban could promote healthier social development.
While opinions vary widely, most teens see social media as both a tool for self-expression and a potential source of harm. Whether it’s fostering creativity, connecting with others, or posing risks like addiction and privacy invasion, social media plays a significant role in their lives. Addressing its challenges requires balancing regulation, education, and personal responsibility rather than outright bans.
Enforcement and Privacy Concerns
Another major topic of debate was how the ban would be enforced. Teens worried that requiring ID verification could jeopardize privacy. “If you try to enforce this with an ID, there’s a high chance that people will just fake it,” said a 16-year-old boy from the Netherlands.
The potential misuse of personal information was another concern. The UK teen noted that age verification systems might make sensitive data accessible to governments and corporations, raising the risk of surveillance and breaches of privacy.
For the most teens, the idea of banning social media feels unrealistic. Sam, 20, from the Netherlands, agrees that enforcing a ban is almost impossible. He acknowledges the harm social media can cause, especially for younger kids, but worries that implementing a ban will be difficult: “Policing this will be extremely difficult, especially since the entire younger generation is now used to it. Getting them “quit” will be very hard.”
Alternative solution
Most teens agreed on one thing: education and moderation are better solutions than outright bans. “Children just need to learn how to handle social media properly,” said a 16-year-old teen girl from the Netherlands. She suggested that parents, schools, and platforms work together to educate young users about the risks and responsibilities of social media.
Some teens proposed additional measures, such as mandatory video lessons on social media or built-in time restrictions on apps. These ideas, they argued, together with parental involvement, such as discussions about social media’s effects could help reduce harm without isolating teens from their digital world.
A complex debate
Overall, it’s clear that while the goal of protecting young people from the dangers of social media is important, there’s a lot of debate among teenagers about how best to go about it. Many feel that the issue lies more with societal problems, like addiction and privacy, rather than the platforms themselves. As more governments look to follow Australia’s example, it seems the conversation about how to balance safety, freedom, and social media use is just getting started.
While adults debate policy, teens are clear about one thing: their voices must be heard. As one youth advocate put it, “We need to be involved in developing solutions.”
What do you think? Should governments decide how social media is used, or should it be up to parents and teens themselves?
Online Safety 