Family First today welcomed the introduction of the national ban on social media accounts for children under 16, calling it a long-overdue step to protect young people from the escalating mental-health crisis fuelled by Big Tech.
National Director Lyle Shelton said the move is a good first step, aligning with the warnings of US social psychologist Jonathan Haidt and with the position Family First has long advocated.
“Children have been targeted, manipulated and harmed by social media platforms and their algorithms for far too long. Giving them space to grow, mature and build resilience away from these engineered addictions is absolutely the right thing to do,” Mr Shelton said.
“The Big Tech giants are too powerful for parents to fight alone without collective action from the entire community backing them,” Mr Shelton said.
Family First agrees with Haidt’s comments in today’s Sydney Morning Herald:
“A common criticism of the policy has been that it is a ban so severe that it will block children from watching videos on YouTube and teachers from using YouTube videos in their classes. This is false; contrary to their claims, the law does not block kids from accessing content. In the words of the eSafety Commissioner, ‘It’s not a ban, it’s a delay to having accounts.’ This distinction matters. When a user creates an account, they enter into a contractual relationship with a platform and authorise a company to collect data, personalise an infinite feed around their behaviour, push notifications designed to capture their attention, expose them to direct messages from strangers, and incentivise them to stay online far longer than they intend.”
Mr Shelton said while the under 16 social media ban is welcome, it doesn’t let the Albanese Government off the hook.
“If Labor were serious about protecting children online, they would have banned access to Pornhub. Nothing destroys childhood innocence faster and exploits vulnerable young women than industrial-scale online pornography. Pornhub should be shut down completely.”
Mr Shelton also noted Family First’s longstanding opposition to a digital ID, and welcomed the government’s decision not to use a digital ID system as the enforcement mechanism.
“Family First supports protecting children from harmful technology — but we will never support the creation of a digital ID. As Haidt notes, the technology to enforce a ban is not perfected but that shouldn’t stop us from making a start.”
Mr Shelton said the government’s policy inconsistency raises deeper questions about its true commitment to children’s wellbeing.
“A government that claims to care about children’s mental health cannot at the same time push universal, industrialised childcare for babies barely out of the womb. The evidence is clear: children under three need constant contact with their mothers in those vulnerable years. No amount of anti-motherhood ideology spin rewrite child-development science.
“Growing flourishing children must mean more than banning TikTok for teenagers while ignoring the tsunami of online porn and undermining the needs of infants.”
Mr Shelton said the new law is a step forward — but only one step.
“The social media ban is good. But the government’s overall record on children is patchy at best and cynical at worst. Families should not be fooled: the Albanese Government still has a long way to go before it can claim to be serious about protecting kids.”
Contact details:
