The Hidden Costs of the U16 Ban

The Government’s new U16 Social Media Ban is being sold as a safeguard for children. But as every parent knows, banning something doesn’t make the problem disappear. It just changes where and how it shows up.

Prohibition in Practice

We’ve seen prohibition fail before. From alcohol to gambling restrictions, Australians know that people — especially young people — find workarounds. Social media is no different. Teens already use VPNs to change their location, fake birth dates to sign up, and jump onto encrypted messaging apps like Telegram or Discord.

Cut them off from mainstream platforms like Instagram or YouTube, and they won’t suddenly stop wanting to connect with friends. They’ll move to less visible spaces — places where there are no community standards, fewer safety tools, and where predatory behaviour is harder to detect. That’s not safety. That’s risk by design.

What the Trial Showed

The Government’s own Age Assurance Technology Trial (September 2025) made this clear. It found serious problems with accuracy, privacy and accessibility. Even the eSafety Commissioner admitted there was no perfect method, and that technologies like facial analysis or ID uploads raised “significant issues” for families. Yet the ban presses ahead.

Creating Inequality

There’s another cost few are talking about: inequality. Families with money will find ways around the restrictions — buying overseas VPN subscriptions or using alternate devices. Families without those resources won’t. Their kids will be left excluded from online learning tools, social groups and cultural conversations that shape their generation. A “safety law” ends up deepening divides between kids.

Ignoring Real Solutions

Most parents don’t want blanket bans. They want guidance. They want tools that help them supervise online use, and resources to teach kids how to navigate the digital world with resilience. Other countries are moving in that direction: the UK has focused on digital literacy programs, Canada has emphasised parental control tools, and in the US, debates centre on balancing access with accountability.

Australia, meanwhile, has chosen prohibition — a strategy with a track record of failure.

What We Stand to Lose

Beyond the risks to kids, there’s something bigger at stake. Every time government reaches for the blunt instrument of a ban, it chips away at the principle that families know best how to raise their children.

The U16 Ban may sound like protection, but in practice it will:

  • Push kids into unregulated online spaces

  • Reduce parental oversight

  • Create inequality between families

  • Ignore proven, evidence-based alternatives

The bottom line: this law doesn’t make children safer. It makes them less visible, less supported, and more vulnerable.

👉 Australians deserve better than prohibition. [Read our submission] and make your voice heard before this law takes hold.