Australia to ban social media for children: How could this impact marketers?

The Australian government has introduced a bill in parliament that aims to ban social media for children under 16.

It also proposed fines of up to A$49.5 million for social media platforms that have systemic breaches.

Australia plans to trial an age-verification system. This reportedly may include biometrics or government identification to enforce a social media age cut-off.

According to prime minister Anthony Albanese earlier this year, the minimum age is to ensure that Australian children are better protected from online harms. 

“We know social media is causing social harm, and it is taking kids away from real friends and real experiences. Australian young people deserve better, and I stand with them and with all Australian parents in protecting our kids," said Albanese.

“The safety and mental and physical health of our young people is paramount. We’re supporting parents and keeping kids safe by taking this action, because enough is enough," he added at the time. 

Don't miss: MY govt looks to other countries to tackle social media usage by minors

While this law is not in effect in places such as Singapore and Malaysia, these issues still hit home. In fact, earlier in September, Malaysia communications minister Fahmi Fadzil said that the government will learn from other countries on how to tackle issues regarding social media usage by minors.

He even received support from the Communications and Multimedia Content Forum of Malaysia (Content Forum) to ensure that children under the age of 13 do not have their own social media accounts in April this year. 

Meanwhile, in Singapore, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) issued a code of practice in July last year with a tighter control on advertisements on the social media accounts of children to minimise their exposure to harmful content.

Saying that, we spoke to leaders of some agencies in Singapore and Malaysia to find out how such a law banning children on social media could affect marketers and advertising as we know it. 

Chito Jusi, client president, media, dentsu Singapore

What do you think of this law?

I think that the law is based on good intentions. Prolonged exposure to social media can have negative mental repercussions on users, especially younger audiences who do not yet have the maturity to filter and control their usage properly.

That said, a ban by itself may not be the answer. What we may end up seeing is children bringing the usage of social media platforms underground, such as with VPNs. I believe a multi-pronged approach of government regulations, parental support, and tech platform cooperation would be more effective in addressing issues of children's physical and mental well-being.

There is still some good that can come from being on social media though, and a ban is too blunt an approach, which disregards the positive impact that being present on social media can give to children.

How does banning social media for children impact marketers?

It will depend on the age level impacted by the ban. Some platforms don't allow targeting under 18-year-olds, some allow targeting for as young as 13-year-olds. However, while social media is a massive part of most advertisers' channel mixes, there will be other channels that can be used to communicate with younger consumers such as gaming channels, music streaming apps, etc.

While a ban like this might be considered by other countries if it proves effective in Australia, personally, I don’t see it taking shape around the region.

There isn’t much regulatory appetite to impose something as drastic as a social media ban to protect children's mental well-being. I believe marketers and governments would prefer to collaborate with social media companies to better monitor content that children are exposed to and provide support and education to ensure children are better equipped to handle what they see online.

What are some challenges you foresee and how can marketers overcome this?

If the ban goes through, marketers that have younger consumers as a target audience will be forced to review their messaging and channel strategies. A huge part of marketing to younger consumers is through social media influencers.

If that goes away, alternative media channels will have to be identified and a way of engaging with younger consumers identified. Marketers might also need to understand how they can get their messages through to children through speaking with parents and families in general instead of tailor-fitting content for younger consumers directly.

Suzen Chai, general manager, LOKi Digital

What do you think of this law? 

As we have seen in Malaysia with kids being exposed to social media from an early age, it has had a negative impact as it has driven children to have a consumerist mindset early on.

Also, with social media platforms having relaxed age parameters this leads to children being exposed to unwanted content.

Hence, this would help in reducing these occasions. I welcome this type of legislation in guarding young children from the addictive and harmful effects of social media.

How does banning social media for children impact marketers?

The ban would be more of an inconvenience rather than a game changer. It would nudge marketers to relook at their creative and media strategies and to identify other effective channels to engage these consumers. This is an opportunity for marketers to apply their creative problem solving to this new challenge and let the best win.

What are some challenges you foresee and how can marketers overcome this?

Although kids and families are a sought-after consumer segment for most marketers, this change might be a good first step in making marketing more ethical in the long term.

However, in the short to medium term, we suspect that marketers who engage with content creators will need to adapt fast so as to remain relevant towards their audience by exploring other channels such as on-ground events to engage with these segments.

Rengeeta Rendava, founder and managing director, Mad Hat Asia 

What do you think of this law? 

As both a parent to young children and a marketer, I understand the good intent behind this proposed ban given social media's well documented ill effects on impressionable young minds. While the intention is commendable, balancing regulation with the realities of how young people use technology will be challenging to say the least. It strikes me as a move that is unlikely to be enforceable nor sustainable in its impact.

How does banning social media for children impact marketers?

We suspect there will be significant uptick in platforms that are open world, encrypted and less regulated- ranging from Telegram to Roblox, which may be an opportunity for marketers, but is a double-edged sword.

A more impactful approach, in my view, could focus on educating parents and schools on identifying and dealing with issues such as cyber bullying, and holding social media platforms accountable for content boundaries for young users.

Robust education in digital literacy, responsible social media use and parental guidance should also play key roles in protecting children, rather than relying on age restrictions.

If the objective is primarily to get kids "out to the footie fields", more integral sports, agricultural and overall experiential learning programs might be better channeling of resources.

What are some challenges you foresee and how can marketers overcome this?

If this ban were somehow effective in driving kids toward outdoor activities or other offline spaces, then outdoor advertising, celebrity endorsements, and relevant brand collaborations would be more major plays. Influencer marketing, particularly involving younger creators, will likely be most impacted.

Brands who currently target their digital marketing directly at Gen Alphas will adapt their strategies toward targeting families as a whole, allowing for a more indirect, yet effective, approach to reaching younger audiences.

The ban will likely expose to consumers which brands are doing the right thing by kids.

Brands that take a stand on child safety or partner with advocates could come out on top by showing they’re responsible, trustworthy and put family values at the forefront.

Tanner Nagib, strategic advisor, REBL 

What do you think of this law? 

This law reflects a growing concern about the mental health, privacy, and safety of children in the digital space. Social media offers both opportunities and risks, especially for younger users who are vulnerable to cyberbullying, exposure to inappropriate content, and the pressures of social comparison.

Setting a minimum age of 16 acknowledges these risks, but we must also recognise that when humans are told they can’t do something, they often find a way to do it anyway or shift to something else. Teens may turn to unregulated apps or more extreme online environments to bypass restrictions, potentially leading to even more severe consequences.

A more comprehensive solution might be for social platforms to create a gated channel for users under 16. This could involve stricter safety guidelines, more robust validation processes, and even a parental backdoor for account monitoring.

Such a system could ensure safer interactions while allowing children to engage online in a controlled and educational way, emphasising the importance of digital literacy and social interaction.

This approach would be more beneficial than pushing them into riskier alternatives, balancing protection with the need for digital literacy and social interaction.

How does banning social media for children impact marketers?

A law like this would undoubtedly reshape how marketers approach their strategies. Many campaigns, especially in sectors like entertainment, fashion, and gaming, have traditionally been targeted at younger audiences via social media. With restrictions in place, marketers will need to shift their focus, investing in age-appropriate platforms or using more traditional channels like television, out-of-home media, events, and family-oriented content.

This shift could be positive for the marketing and advertising industry as it encourages a return to more diversified and creative outreach methods.

What are some challenges you foresee and how can marketers overcome this?

We may also see a rise in brands investing in their own digital ecosystems, such as branded apps, exclusive content platforms, and websites, to maintain engagement with younger audiences in a controlled and safe environment. This would help prevent younger users from turning to unregulated platforms, but it could challenge existing social platforms to stay relevant to advertisers.

The bottom line is that brands will need to get creative. However, teenagers may find workarounds to access social media, so brands must be cautious not to appear as though they are encouraging users to bypass the law.

Anton Reyniers, head of strategy, We Are Social Singapore

What do you think of this law?

Any law centered on protecting children from harm is undoubtedly a good thing. The Australian government is clearly motivated to do so by raising the age of access to social media.

Of course, the next big question is how will this legislation be effective? How will it be impactful if younger children are accessing social media through other means, such as adult accounts and therefore be exposed to content that’s not suitable? The passing of this law should absolutely not be considered job done, but instead the start of an evergreen approach around online child protection.

How does banning social media for children impact marketers?

Marketers and agencies with a moral compass shouldn’t be concerned. The industry has generally been very good at self-regulating with advertising to children so many are already prepared for this. If anything, this will make sure the industry remains responsible and vigilant in protecting children online.

Just like with GDPR and the shift around data privacy, we will likely see other markets follow suit.

Here in Singapore, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) introduced a code of practice last year to minimise advertising to children across social media channels. So, it makes sense for marketers who work across different countries to be prepared for evolving restrictions around how they advertise and communicate with children online and through social media.

Brands that are targeting children may need to rethink how social media will fit into their strategy.

Targeting young children for commercial purposes is blatantly wrong and so social platforms having their hand forced by law is a societal step forward. How this is consistently managed, to ensure this bill is an always-on policy remains to be seen.

What are some challenges you foresee and how can marketers overcome this?

Marketers shouldn’t consider this a challenge to overcome. Instead embrace, support and contribute to how communication needs to constantly evolve to be in-step with the moral needs of society, alongside law makers. The real challenge is to understand where social platforms haven’t caught up and proactively step-up with recommendations that are responsible to close that moral gap.

I believe industry practitioners feel this way too. With this mindset combined with moves such as government legislation, marketers and their agency partners will help ensure that the creative industry does what it needs to do; reach those who are appropriate to reach whilst not compromising serious areas such as child safety.

Related articles: 
MCMC to meet social media giants amid AI and deepfake worries
Social media license to remain despite objections from AIC
Study: Most major social media platforms fail to moderate suicide and self-harm content