School Bullies Have Moved Online: Is Banning Under-16s from Social Media the Answer?

By Hilary Whiteman, CNN



As technology advances, its impact on young minds becomes an increasingly pressing issue. Cyberbullying, once a side effect of digital communication, has spiraled into a pervasive problem, affecting children across the globe. Recent debates in Australia over banning social media for under-16s aim to address this crisis, but the solution remains divisive.

The Rise of Online Bullying

Kirra Pendergast, a cyber safety educator and founder of Safe on Social, interacts with thousands of teenagers annually. She’s seen the darker side of their online lives: bullying, threats, sextortion, and more. However, a recent incident during one of her school talks highlighted the extent to which online behavior shapes real-world interactions.

During a session with students aged 12 and 13, Pendergast faced an onslaught of misogynistic comments inspired by online influencers. The experience led her to reassess her stance on regulating children's access to social media.

“I went through every argument against a ban and realized they were outweighed by the harm being caused,” Pendergast said. Her change in perspective reflects a growing sentiment among educators, parents, and policymakers who believe that stricter regulations are necessary to curb the negative effects of social media.

Proposed Legislation: A Game-Changer?

The Australian government is preparing to implement “world-leading” legislation that would ban children under 16 from accessing social media platforms such as Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook. Violating platforms could face fines of up to AU$50 million ($32 million).

This legislation aims to enforce age verification technologies to ensure compliance, though concerns over privacy and enforcement challenges linger. Critics argue that children circumventing the rules may turn to less regulated, darker corners of the internet.



The Toll of Cyberbullying

Recent tragedies underscore the urgency of the issue. In September, 12-year-old Charlotte O’Brien took her life following relentless bullying on Snapchat. A month later, Ella Catley-Crawford, also 12, suffered a similar fate after being catfished and humiliated online.

Charlotte’s parents have since championed a campaign to raise the social media age limit to 16, driven by their daughter’s last plea for awareness. Their petition has amassed over 124,000 signatures, highlighting the widespread support for stricter controls.

Dr. Danielle Einstein, a clinical psychologist, supports the ban, emphasizing how social media replaces critical face-to-face interactions that teach children conflict resolution. “Mistakes made online are amplified, with devastating consequences,” she said.

A Political Tug-of-War

The proposed ban has garnered bipartisan support, a rarity in Australian politics. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and opposition leaders back the legislation, framing it as a necessary step to protect children’s mental health.

However, critics argue that the move is politically motivated, with federal elections looming. Media giant News Corporation, which has its own disputes with Meta, has also championed the ban, intensifying speculation about ulterior motives.

Amanda Third, co-director of the Young and Resilient Research Centre at Western Sydney University, cautions against viewing the ban as a panacea. “It’s an appealing solution for parents, but it won’t eliminate the challenges posed by social media,” she said, advocating for a more nuanced approach.

The Industry Pushback

Social media platforms have expressed concerns over the legislation. DIGI, an industry body representing companies like Meta and Snap, argues that the ban would shift the problem rather than solve it.

Snap Inc., the parent company of Snapchat, claims to have taken steps to address bullying, urging users to block and report offenders. Meta has partnered with organizations like Kids Helpline to promote anti-bullying campaigns, emphasizing user empowerment over regulatory bans.

Despite these efforts, public trust in tech companies remains low, with many viewing them as prioritizing profits over user safety.

The Parental Dilemma

For many parents, the harmful effects of social media are all too real. Dany Elachi, co-founder of the Heads Up Alliance, decided to delay giving his children smartphones after witnessing the negative impact on their lives.

“We caught our daughter messaging friends at midnight, and that’s when we knew we couldn’t continue like this,” he said. Elachi’s experience reflects a broader parental struggle to balance technological access with emotional well-being.

Experts Call for Collaboration

A coalition of 140 experts recently criticized the ban as a “blunt” tool, arguing that it absolves tech companies of their responsibility to innovate safer platforms. Instead, they advocate for co-designed solutions that involve young people in the policymaking process.

The recent parliamentary committee report echoed these sentiments, recommending stricter digital jurisdiction laws and collaborative strategies over outright bans.

The Broader Implications

While the legislation aims to protect children, its broader implications for privacy and digital freedoms cannot be ignored. Critics like Elon Musk, owner of X (formerly Twitter), have labeled the ban excessive government intervention, warning of potential overreach.

Nonetheless, supporters argue that even partial success justifies the effort. As Pendergast put it: “If a simple rule protects one child and helps them grow into a strong, resilient young person, isn’t that worth it?”