Monash Experts Weigh In on Australian Government's Under-16 Social Media Ban
- Written by Times Media
Monash University – With the Australian government's new social media ban for children under 16 set to come into effect on December 10, a range of Monash University experts have offered commentary on the policy's complex implications across political, social, legal, and psychological fields.The Impact on Young People's Development and Connection
One key area of concern is the ban's effect on civic engagement and social support.
Associate Professor Zareh Ghazarian, Head of Politics and International Relations, Monash School of Social Sciences, notes that while the ban aims to safeguard youth, it "has the potential to impact the development of their political knowledge." He suggests social media was a vital tool for some teachers to expose students to political debates. The ban, therefore, presents an "ideal opportunity to better support teachers" in developing new sources for civics and citizenship education.
The potential harm is especially pronounced for vulnerable groups, according to Professor Paula Gerber, Faculty of Law. She highlights that LGBTIQA+ youth, in particular, "rely heavily on social media for mental health support, connection, community building and identity development." Professor Gerber cites national survey data showing nearly three-quarters of young trans Australians report feeling better about themselves using social media. She argues that restricting access risks "disproportionately affecting vulnerable youth" and potentially violates international laws, including the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child regarding freedom of expression and access to information.
Associate Professor Brady Robards, Sociology, Faculty of Arts, reinforces these concerns, outlining potential harms such as:
- Driving young people to less regulated online spaces.
- Reducing channels for help-seeking from trusted adults.
- Negative impacts on marginalised young people (regional/rural, disability, LGBTQIA+, etc.) who depend on social media for connection and belonging.
Enforcement, Paternalism, and Digital Literacy
The mechanism and philosophy behind the ban have also drawn scrutiny from legal and education experts.
Associate Professor Eric Windholz, Faculty of Law, describes the ban as a "significant extension of past regulation, and a new high water mark in the state’s paternalism." He points out the irony that the government is essentially stating parents are "unable or unwilling to regulate their own children's behaviour," while simultaneously depending on those same parents for compliance. Furthermore, he warns of the "forbidden fruit effect," suggesting that regulatory prohibitions entice the curious to experiment, potentially leading to circumvention and exploitation.
Dr Clare Southerton, School of Education Culture & Society, Faculty of Education, questions the effectiveness of the ban itself. "We do not yet have any evidence that social media bans are effective at addressing social media harms," she states. Dr. Southerton argues that bans "do not support young people to learn safe social media use" and that digital literacy and critical engagement must be actively taught, rather than hoping young people will develop these skills by merely delaying their access.The Role of Parents
Professor Marie Yap, a Psychologist and parenting expert at the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, offers guidance for parents on navigating the change. She advises that for children who rely heavily on social media, the transition is likely to involve emotions ranging from anxiety and grief to anger.
Professor Yap stresses the importance of parental preparation and empathy:
- Do your research on accurate information, such as the Australian eSafety Commissioner's website.
- Be mindful of your tone, avoiding judgement or forcefulness, and validating your children’s feelings.
- Avoid negative reactions to emotional outbursts, and instead, focus on keeping the dialogue open and building trust. "Creating a safe space for your children to talk openly will strengthen your relationship," she says.
On the industry and legal side, the ban is seen as a necessary move by some, while the likelihood of a legal challenge succeeding is considered low.
Professor Jon Rouse, AI for Law Enforcement and Community Safety (AiLECS) Lab, Faculty of Information Technology, views the new age restrictions as a "long-overdue recalibration of responsibility in the digital environment." He argues that the industry has systematically prioritised "growth and revenue" over children's safety, calling the new restrictions a "response to a systemic failure of self-regulation." Professor Rouse's focus is on ensuring the delay is matched with "rigorous age-assurance, independent oversight of platform practices, and investment in education and support for families."
Finally, Professor Luke Beck, Professor of Constitutional Law, Faculty of Law, commented on the High Court challenge to the ban, noting that "Australia has lots of similar laws restricting young people’s access to spaces and things that sometimes have political content to protect their wellbeing." He concluded that "The challenge looks pretty weak."
