We’ve all heard the concerns — cyberbullying, distorted realities, the harms of social media. But let’s be honest, these issues aren’t exclusive to the digital world. Bullying happens in schools, abuse exists in homes, and people take health risks every day in pursuit of unattainable beauty standards. Do we ban those things? No. Instead, we address the root causes and work towards solutions. So why should social media be any different?

The government's proposed ban on social media for those under 16 removes this scrunchie — the tool that gathers young people together. Without it, we risk feeling fragmented and isolated. Out of control.

Is this really the best way forward?

This study was inspired by Four Corners’ special report Disconnected, which explores the dangers of social media, particularly for young people. But social media is more than its flaws — it empowers, connects, and informs. Instead of silencing young voices through prohibition, we must regulate platforms, hold companies accountable, and create a safer digital space. Rather than banning social platforms, we must implement meaningful reforms that address its flaws while preserving its value in modern society.

Put your hand up if you’ve moved houses before. Most of you, right? Social media is a lifeline for staying connected with distant friends and families especially when school or home life may be isolating.

Professor Lisa Given warns that banning it would sever these crucial relationships. We can already see the consequences in Florida’s recent law requiring age verification for social media users over 14 (North, 2025). However, the law lacks clarity — would platforms like Roblox, used by millions, also be restricted?

For young people, these spaces aren’t just for entertainment; they’re essential for maintaining social bonds. I know this first-hand. When I moved from Victoria to Queensland, social media was the only reason I stayed connected with my friends and family. How would you feel if you lost touch with the people who matter most to you?

With over 5 billion active users worldwide (Chaffey, 2025), banning social media would isolate young Australians from the voices that support them. Can we really afford to take that away?

Banning social media for those under 16 isn’t just restrictive — it’s censorship. It suppresses young voices and denies them the ability to navigate an increasingly digital world. Technology is deeply embedded in modern life, and cutting off access only creates a generation unprepared for their own future.

Imagine being 10 years old today, banned from social media until you are 16. Then, on your 16th birthday, you’re suddenly expected to navigate the digital world effortlessly — but you lack the skills.

Professor Tama Leaver from Curtin University compares this to filling a pool with concrete and then expecting children to swim when they turn 16 (Henry, 2024). National Student Council President Anjali Verma stresses that social media is inevitable, so young people must learn to navigate it safely (North, 2025). Similarly, Professor Toby Murray criticises the exclusion of young Australians from regulation discussions, arguing that safety measures should protect all users, not just children (Henry, 2024).

Yes, some will say the government is right to impose a ban on those under 16. They will claim social media exposes children to harmful influences before their brains are properly developed. In response to that I say that the government is overly focused on the potential harms whilst ignoring the significant benefits. Our right to choose should not be taken away. Despite the ageist and paternalistic attitudes of those who would ban teenagers from these platforms, social media isn’t going anywhere.

It provides a platform to challenge systems of control, amplifies unheard voices, and fosters social awareness. Instead of restricting access, we must regulate and educate — ensuring social media remains a safe, inclusive, and empowering space.

Beyond denying young people their future, the government risks turning ordinary teenagers into criminals just for wanting to stay connected. History has proven that bans don’t eliminate demand — they drive it underground. Take the US Prohibition era of the 1920s. The government banned alcohol to reduce social problems — however instead, crime skyrocketed. Homicides increased by 78%, and federal prison populations surged by 366%. (Thornton, 1991). This was because although it being illegal, people were still able to access alcohol, from underground markets.

Even Prohibition supporters like Evan Fisher admitted that it only fuelled demand for more dangerous substitutes such as opium and medicinal 95% pure alcohol, leading to a rise in alcohol poisoning deaths (Thornton, 1991). Instead of banning desire, we must regulate it.

Banning social media won’t stop teenagers from using it — it will just push them to unsafe, unregulated platforms. Studies from Edith Cowan University show that teenagers are already bypassing restrictions through VPNs and fake IDs. Professor Leila Green warns: "Restricting access will only make social media more enticing." University of Melbourne’s Toby Murray adds, “We’re already seeing this with other bans, like underage vaping.” And we know how that’s going — 43% of Australian students aged 12-17 have illegally accessed vapes, despite strict regulations (Grayson, 2023). Just like Prohibition failed, a social media ban will fail too.

Instead of criminalising young people for wanting to connect, we must regulate platforms responsibly.

Prohibition fails. Regulation protects.

So, what’s the real solution? We don’t need a ban—we need accountability.

Platforms must be strictly regulated to ensure user safety through fines for failing to address cyberbullying, independent audits, and transparency reports. Legal obligations should mandate timely removal of harmful or exploitative content, with penalties for non-compliance. These reforms would promote responsibility without silencing the younger people.

Social media is where younger generations feel heard. It is a tool for empowerment, education, and connection. Let's all take action to oppose the government's proposed ban. Spread the word and make sure everyone understands that banning social media will harm society. Instead of restricting access, we must regulate platforms to create a safer digital space.

Let’s fix the problem, not punish the people.

References

Chaffey, D. (2025, Jan 2). Global social media statistics research summary. Retrieved from Smart Insights: https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/

Grayson, H. (2023). Vaping in high school kids leaps. Retrieved from Medical Republic : https://www.medicalrepublic.com.au/vaping-in-high-school-kids-leaps-from-13-to-30/104904

Henry, O. (2024, Sep). Should we really ban social media for kids? Retrieved from SMC: https://www.smc.org.au/news/should-we-really-ban-social-media-for-kids

Long, T. (2024, May 26). Why a social media ban for kids won't help. Retrieved from 9 News: https://www.9news.com.au/technology/why-a-social-media-ban-for-kids-wont-help--the-risks-are-far-greater-than-just-social-media/fc8040aa-89eb-4ff3-92bb-b2b087ff5064

North, A. (2025, Jan 9). Why we shouldn’t ban kids from social media. Retrieved from Vox: https://www.vox.com/life/393812/social-media-ban-australia-florida-teens-kids

Thorton, M. (1991, July). Alcohol Prohibition Was a Failure. Retrieved from CATO: https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/alcohol-prohibition-was-failure#the-iron-law-of-prohibition

Yellow. (2025, Feb). Business Statistics. Retrieved from Yellow: https://www.yellow.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Yellow-Social-Media-Business-Stats.pdf