Learning from Australia, Social Media Bans Are Not a Solution for Child Protection

JAKARTA - The Australian government's policy prohibiting teenagers under the age of 16 from accessing social media has drawn criticism from various quarters. More than a month since it was implemented, the rule is considered ineffective in protecting children and adolescents, and even has the potential to cut off the social connection of young groups, especially from multicultural communities.

Multicultural Youth Advocacy Network (MYAN), an advocacy organization for young people from migrant and multicultural backgrounds in Australia, assessed that the age-restricted approach actually had social impacts that escaped the government's calculations.

MYAN chairman Carmel Guerra said social media for many teenagers is not just entertainment, but an important space to maintain cross-country family relationships, build identity, and seek emotional support.

"This ban cuts off teenagers from their communities and families in different parts of the world. Digital access is an important part of belonging and social connectedness," Guerra said in his statement, Tuesday, January 27.

According to him, the policy of restricting access in a comprehensive manner risks making young people from migrant communities increasingly isolated, especially those who live in regional areas and do not have much face-to-face interaction space.

"For multicultural teenagers, social media is a bridge to their culture and families. When that access is closed, it's not just the apps that are lost, but also social support," he said.

A number of findings show that the policy also faces problems of effectiveness. Many teenagers are reported to migrate to alternative platforms that are less known and less supervised. This condition is considered to increase the risk of exposure to hate speech and harmful content.

On the other hand, the age verification system is said to be easy to circumvent. The use of parental accounts, identity manipulation, to technological tricks to pass the face scan are common practices.

Academics from the QUT Digital Media Research Centre, Professor Daniel Angus, assessed that the age ban did not target the root of the digital security problem. Meanwhile, Professor Tama Leaver from Curtin University found that teenagers were actively sharing ways to circumvent the verification system.

The Australian Human Rights Commission also reminded that child protection should focus on moderating harmful content, not restricting the right to access information. The institution quoted the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child's guidelines which emphasize the importance of balancing security and digital participation rights.

For MYAN, the main lesson from Australia's policy is that a total ban does not automatically make the digital space safer.

"Young people will still find ways to connect. The question is, are they in a safe space or are they in a more risky and unsupervised space," Guerra said.

This experience is an important note for Indonesia which is preparing to implement Government Regulation Number 17 of 2025 concerning the Governance of the Implementation of Electronic Systems in Child Protection (PP TUNAS). This regulation regulates the governance of digital platforms, including age verification and parental involvement.

A number of observers believe that Indonesia needs to learn from Australia so that policies do not stop at symbolic prohibitions, but rather focus on platform responsibility, algorithm design, and systemic protection against digital risks.

Thus, child protection in the digital space is not only limiting access, but also ensuring that they remain safely connected without losing the social support that is important for their growth and development.