Could an Australian social media ban for those under 16 inspire America? Experts say it's unlikely

Australia is poised to become the first nation in the world to ban social media accounts for children under 16, but the legislation is unlikely to spark a similar federal measure in the United States, according to several Long Island area experts.

The bill, which passed Australia’s House of Representatives this week and by Wednesday, still had to pass its Senate, would bar those children from having accounts on platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram, according to the Associated Press.

With many mental health experts sounding the alarm on the potential dangers the platforms pose to youth, the legislation, according to the bill, aims to "reduce the risk of harm" to teens and children.

The Australian legislation also would hold social media companies accountable with fines of up to $33 million for failing to establish proper safeguards to prevent young users from accessing their sites. The platforms will have a year if the legislation becomes law to decide how user ages will be verified. According to amendments in the bill, platforms cannot demand that account holders provide government-issued identity documents or digital identification.

While children who spend more than three hours a day on social media are at double the risk of mental health problems, including depression and anxiety, social media also has benefits, according to research cited in a 2023 advisory from U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy.

In June, Murthy recommended cigarette-style labels on social media platforms to warn such sites are "associated with significant mental health harms for adolescents" — a change that would require action from Congress.

But Murthy also has noted that social media benefits include helping young people feel connected and providing access to information.

Some local experts who spoke to Newsday felt the U.S. isn't likely to follow in Australia's potential footsteps because the legislation there is too broad and poses constitutional problems and other issues. Many also agreed a blanket prohibition wouldn't solve the problem of social media's negative impacts, stressing that parenting and education are the real keys to keeping children safe online.

Lindamichelle Baron, a teacher education professor at York College in Queens, said there is a better way to combat the risks that come with these popular platforms.

"I don't want us to remove the responsibility of teaching young people how to navigate and how to engage with social media," Baron said, pointing out that children who aren’t taught in such a way will become older teens with the same untrained behavior and habits.

"My concern is really about not even being able to think critically and to analyze content, and so much of this has to be taught. If it's going to be banned, that's not the answer. We have to consider the extreme necessity for our educators to teach how to navigate this media," said Baron, who also serves as poet laureate for the Town of Hempstead.

While other experts don't believe a measure like Australia’s would win overwhelming political support in the U.S., at least one state already has passed legislation aimed at protecting children when it comes to social media.

Starting in January, children under 14 in Florida won't be allowed to have social media accounts and 14-year-olds and 15-year-olds will require parental permission under a new law, according to Florida legislative records.

Matthew Salzano, a communications researcher at Stony Brook University’s School of Communication and Journalism, said he doesn't believe the U.S. has the "political will" for a federal restriction and has conflicted opinions about Australia’s legislation.

On one hand, he believes it’s a good first step toward protecting children. But he said he also sees disadvantages, like pulling youths away from their friends.

"I think it'll be restrictive in many ways that are negative. And yet, maybe it's the type of statement we need to make to tell big tech we don't want you to steal our children's lives like this," Salzano added.

Alexander Pelaez, a professor of information systems and business analytics at Hofstra University, said while he understands social media is creating challenges for parents and schools, Australia’s measure wouldn't translate to America.

"I think it would be very, very difficult to ban it here in the U.S.," Pelaez said of the age restriction legislation.

In the U.S., Australia’s prohibition would likely violate constitutional protections like free speech, according to experts like Pelaez and Susan Drucker, a Hofstra University journalism professor.

"Minors do have First Amendment rights, and when the government regulates or seeks to regulate expression that's protected by the Constitution, they have to rise to the level of strict scrutiny for judicial review. And that is a very high bar," said Drucker.

She also echoed some critics of Australia's legislation by saying that cutting kids off from platforms could cause more harm by driving "resourceful young people who are very media savvy into darker corners of the web."

Melissa DiMartino, an associate professor of psychology at New York Institute of Technology, said she wouldn't support a blanket ban for children under 16. She said she thinks the onus to protect kids from social media platforms is on parents.

"Parents really need to be monitoring their children," DiMartino said. "I don't think we should shut down social media. I just think that it should be limited and that we should treat the internet as it is, which is a very dangerous place for children."