Australia is preparing for one of its most closely watched policy shifts of the year, as the social media ban for under 16s moves towards its December deadline. The proposal has already attracted global attention, and five University of the Sunshine Coast experts say the stakes for families, schools and governments are far higher than a debate about screen time.
Dr Joe Scott, a Senior Lecturer in Health and Physical Education, does not mince words. “The social media ban for young people couldn’t come soon enough. The evidence linking social media addiction and significant physical and mental health issues in young people is overwhelming. It paints a bleak future for our youth and called for an urgent and significant change.” He says the digital environment has outpaced young people’s ability to cope with it. “Young people remain vulnerable and need our protection. For too long we have watched our kids be lured in by tantalising social media platforms purposely created to capture their attention, glue them to their screens and fuel addiction.”
Dr Scott argues that the transition will demand help for schools and families. “Teachers, particularly Health and Physical Education teachers, will play a pivotal role in helping young people navigate the shift and understand the significant health benefits it may unlock.” He says guidance for parents and teachers is essential as Australia moves into “a step in the right direction”, even if enforcement proves difficult. He sees the decision as part of a larger national stance. “As the nation moves toward implementation, Australians should take pride in leading the global conversation on youth digital safety. If we don’t act to protect the next generation, who will?”
While Dr Scott sees a necessary circuit breaker, other researchers warn that the ban may miss deeper issues. Dr Taliah Prince, a postdoctoral researcher in adolescent brain development, believes the country risks chasing symptoms rather than causes. “Australia’s social media ban for under-16s aims to protect young people from harm – but is it cutting off the branches while leaving the roots?” She points to international evidence that broad prohibitions have weak track records. “Other global studies have warned that blanket bans are too blunt and lack empirical support. Most Australian children (85 percent) already use social media despite age limits, and 95 percent of parents rank online safety as their top concern.”
Her concern is that young people may find workarounds that leave parents even less able to help. “Could this ban drive young people to create fake accounts or use VPNs, making harms harder to monitor?” Dr Prince suggests that a different model could strike a better balance. “If this ban fails, visibility may be the key to protection. Privacy-respectful analytics can track public data, detect bullying or distress, and provide simple wellbeing reports to trusted adults.”
Dr Angela Hinz, a Lecturer in Psychology who studies social media and women’s health, sees the moment as a chance to prevent existing harms from deepening. “The government’s social media ban is a reinforcement of the importance of dealing with the known harms of social media when it comes to adolescents’ mental health, sense of identity, and body image.” She describes the transition as “a welcome ‘window of opportunity’” that could give families time to build healthier habits before teenagers enter the online world. The aim, she says, is to let young people arrive on social platforms “equipped with skills of self-awareness, compassion for themselves and others, and the ability to critically consider the content they’re consuming.”
She says the ban is also a message to tech companies. “This ban sends a powerful message to social media platforms, asking them to take greater responsibility and improve their practices to ensure the wellbeing of young people, not just in Australia but all over the world.”
For Dr Rachael Sharman, a Senior Lecturer in Psychology, the issue comes down to development. “The social media ban is an important first step in ensuring children return to a healthy developmental environment for their physical, psychosocial and emotional development.” She argues that these foundations have direct consequences for relationships, self-regulation and higher reasoning. Like others, she questions how the logistics will be managed, but her broader concern is for childhood itself. “If successful, this will give parents and families the opportunity to reclaim childhood, and ensure the building blocks of the brain are set in place before exposure to what has proved to be a most pernicious influence.” She believes other nations are watching closely. “I suspect the rest of the world is taking such an extraordinary interest in this Australian initiative, to see when and how they can best follow suit for improved wellbeing of their future generations.”
Dr Karen Sutherland, a Senior Lecturer in Public Relations, welcomes the intention but doubts the practicalities. “While the government can be commended for attempting to protect Australia’s young people with its social media ban for under 16s, the reality of how it will actually work is unclear.” She notes the scale of the challenge. “There are literally thousands of social media platforms, and the government will not be able to police all of them.” Dr Sutherland says the process has overlooked public concerns. “It also seems that this decision has been made without careful review of the 15,000 submissions made from the public regarding this legislation.”
Her worry is that technology bans can backfire. “Research from UniSC’s Thompson Institute suggests that in a cyberbullying situation, cutting off access to technology can have negative impacts because it also isolates the victim from their support network.” She argues that education, rather than prohibition, should remain central. “There needs to be greater education for children, parents, and the wider community regarding the critical, safe, and responsible use of technology including social media.”
Support independent community journalism. Support The Indian Sun.
Follow The Indian Sun on X | Instagram | Facebook
Support Independent Community Journalism
Dear Reader,The Indian Sun exists for one reason: to tell stories that might otherwise go unheard.
We report on local councils, state politics, small businesses and cultural festivals. We focus on the Indian diaspora and the wider multicultural community with care, balance and accountability. We publish in print and online, send regular newsletters and produce video content. We also run media training programs to help community organisations share their own stories.
We operate independently.
Community journalism does not have the backing of large media corporations. Advertising revenue fluctuates. Platform algorithms change. Costs continue to rise. Yet the need for credible, grounded reporting in a multicultural Australia has never been greater.
When you support The Indian Sun, you support:
• Independent reporting on issues affecting migrant communities
• Coverage of local and state decisions that shape daily life
• A platform for small businesses and community groups
• Media training that builds skills within the community
• Journalism accountable to readers
We cannot cover everything, but we work to cover what matters.
If you value thoughtful reporting that reflects Australia’s diversity, we invite you to contribute. Every donation helps us maintain the quality and consistency of our work.
Please consider making a contribution today.
Thank you for your support.
The Indian Sun Team
