Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024

Background and Context of the Policy:

According to the Australian Government (2024), Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (Cth) is one of the revolutionizing changes for protection of children who have online access in Australia. The Bill, amending the wider Online Safety Act 2021 and taking effect in December 2025, brings a legally enforceable minimum age of 16 of who will be allowed to access certain social media websites. The social media providers under the legislation should take measures to ensure that children under the established age of 16 are not allowed to create accounts and any non-compliance will result in penalties that are also outlined. It is a regulatory framework where the government will participate in addressing and management of the online risks, and not just leave it to the operators of the platform.

In addition to the legislative framework, the Age Assurance Technology Trials were initiate as a 6.5-million-dollar project to test the practicability, precision and reliability of various age-verification technologies. According to the Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sports and the Arts (2025), the Age Check Certification Scheme (ACCS), involved over 60 technologies provided by 48 vendors and evaluated solutions from the spectrum of digital identity verification through to facial-feature recognition. Not only did the trials attempt to determine the technical performance of these systems, but also the compatibility of these systems with existing digital infrastructures of social media and online services. This is a significant preparation measure as it guarantees that the technological processes will be able to realistically meet the needs of law-enforcement without affecting accessibility, fairness, or privacy. Additionally, the trials provide policymakers with objective evidence to finalize execution, foresee ethical issues, and mitigate possible differences in precision between various demographic groups, thus assuring policymakers that the objective of the policy will remain practically achievable.

Government Concerns, Policy Objectives, and Ethical Considerations

Government Concerns 

The major issue which the Australian Government is concerned with is the protection of young Australians against the various threats related to the use of social media, the exposure to inappropriate material, online bullying, grooming, and online predators. Children are very susceptible to any malicious interaction, manipulative and privacy invasion because social media is very addictive and most minors have access to social media. As highlighted in the explanatory memorandum to the Bill, social media can serious negative implications to children’s psychological well-being, sleep patterns, attention span, and stress levels, while also increasing the risk of exposure to harmful or age-inappropriate content. Furthermore, the issue gets worst with the sophisticated algorithms employed by social media companies, which are intended to enhance user engagement over well-being, resulting in widespread exposure of children to dangerous material (Costello et al., 2023).

Policy Objectives 

The purpose of Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 is to address these risks by standardizing and enforcing the minimum age of 16 for individuals to hold social media accounts. Age-restricting service providers should have an effective system of age-verification and must take punitive measures accordingly for non-compliance. The core objective of the policy is to reduce children’s exposure to harmful online content, while the secondary aim is to push social media companies to prioritise safety measures and responsible platform design. Additionally, the Age Assurance Technology Trials were authorised to explore technological solutions that ensure enforcement mechanisms as practical and can be applied fairly across different populations.

Ethical Concerns 

These measures are associated with a few ethical concerns. According to Evershed and Nicholas (2025), pilot test of age-verification technologies highlighted the racial and demographic biases, particularly affecting Indigenous Australians and Asian descents, which could lead to unequal access or unintended discrimination. Furthermore, the collection and retention of biometric data, such as facial scans, raises significant privacy and security concerns, requiring strict measures to protect the data against misuse or unauthorized access.

Possible Unintended Consequences. 

Age-verification systems might unintentionally exclude legitimate users who are unable to provide the required documentation or who face technological limitations. Additionally, the law does not focus on unlogged browsing whereby underage people can access harmful materials without the need to open accounts, which may be counterproductive to achieve the purposes of the policy (Taylor, 2025). These questions policy’s credibility and effectiveness requiring the evaluation and modification of the policy.

Lessig's "Pathetic Dot" Theory

Lawrence Lessig’s Pathetic Dot theory recognizes human beings as pathetic dots, as their behaviour is influenced and developed by four regulatory agents namely Law, Norms, Market, and Architecture (Code) (Ekstrand, 2020). This framework can be applied to the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 to provide an analytical lens in order to comprehend how the policy controls on children’s use of social media and how mechanisms aimed at such regulation interact to generate intended outcomes.

Law

The legislative framework introduces institutional policies that compel social media houses to avoid the creation of accounts by underage people. The amended version of part 4A of the Online Safety Act 2021 establishes age restrictions, definition, privacy requirements and non-compliance fines. These legal preconditions are used as deterring factors, forcing platforms to introduce age-verification systems and limiting underage visitors with structural obstacles to access. The law is to serve as the support of the regulatory scheme as it identifies the requirements and reprisals and offers clarity to the users and suppliers.

Norms

According to Panek et al. (2025), social norms guide the perceptions of children, parents, and platform operators regarding proper online conduct. By setting a minimum age, the policy influences social expectations about appropriate participation and responsible use of digital technologies. Parents and platforms alike can be encouraged by such normative influence to monitor their children’s activity on the internet and adopt more responsible content moderation and user-protective practices. Published standards thus work together with legal requirements to support compliance with social pressure and common expectations.

Market

Economic incentives are significant to determine compliance (Liu,2025). The threat of fines and reputational harm for noncompliance encourages platforms to put resources into effective age-verification systems. Innovation to age-assurance technologies is also an issue that is triggered by market forces, as providers compete to deliver solutions that are effective, easy to use, and secure. This aspect of the economy helps in aligning the goals of the business with regulatory objectives, which leads to increased chances of feasibility.

Architecture (Code)

The architecture operationalising the policy is represented by technological infrastructure consisting of algorithms (Zhou, 2020), age-verification systems and the design of the platform. The legal and normative expectation of a change in behavior depends on the effectiveness of this system. Racial prejudice, falsehood, or technical obstacles are just some of the problems that demonstrate how careful planning and regular evaluation are essential to provide equity and equal accessibility.

Hence this lens represents a co-ordinated system where law, social expectations, economic incentives and technological architecture all transform children and social-media platforms outcomes.

Effectiveness of the Policy and Recommendations. 

Achievement of Objectives 

The objectives stated in the policy is to protect its young users against online harms and create the age-appropriate interaction, are significant. However, the effectiveness of the given policy relates inevitably to the accuracy and objectivity of the age-verifying technologies. The reported incidences of racial bias and inaccuracies in the age-estimation make the subject matter concerning whether the policy can achieve the objectives with fairness (Evershed & Nicholas, 2025).

Reasonableness of the Policy

Although the overall purpose of the policy seems to be logical, its implementation can create unintended negative effects. The reliance on facial recognition systems as well as the omission of unlogged browsing might lead to injustices in access and security of the users. Furthermore, the privacy implications due to collection of biometric data requires careful consideration and administering strict measures to reduce the breaches that may occur.

Recommendations 

In order to make the policy more equitable and credible, the following recommendations are proposed:

• Improve Technological Accuracy: Investment in the research and implementation of age-verification mechanisms which deliver high accuracy with different groups along demographic lines will help in curbing the racism effect as well as errors in estimations.
• Controlling Unlogged Browsing: The system must restrict the accessibility for unlogged individuals, meaning those without accounts, so that teenagers cannot avoid digital protective systems by merely turning on an account and browsing without limitations.
• Enhance Privacy Rights: Design and implement strict data-protective measures that safeguard the personal and biometric data of users, and ensure that they comply with the relevant privacy laws.
• Continuous Monitoring and Evaluation: On regular basis, periodically evaluate the performances of the policy and its implementation, and make adjustment strategies for the new challenges and advancements in technology.

Conclusion

The proposal of the bill, the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024, which represents a significant contribution to the safety of young Australians in the online space. Although the goals of the bill are noble, the effectiveness of the bill depends on the equitable and accurate implementation of the age-verification measures; as well as a full evaluation of other possible unintentional circumstances. The policy has a higher likelihood of achieving the stated goals by systematically addressing the concerns as well as taking into account the recommendations to create a more cyber-safe environment where everyone can benefit from the online space.

References:

Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sports and the Arts. (2025, September 1). Age Assurance Technology Trial—Final Report. https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/age-assurance-technology-trial-final-report

Australian Government. (2024). Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 (No. 127 of 2024). Parliament of Australia. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7284

Costello, N., Sutton, R., Jones, M., Almassian, M., Raffoul, A., Ojumu, O., ... & Austin, S. B. (2023). Algorithms, addiction, and adolescent mental health: An interdisciplinary study to inform state-level policy action to protect youth from the dangers of social media. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 49(2-3), 135-172.

Ekstrand, V. S. (2020). Lessig, Lawrence. The Law of the Horse: What Cyberlaw Might Teach, 113 Harv. L. Rev. 501 (1999). Communication Law and Policy, 25(3), 406-411.

Evershed, N., & Nicholas, J. (2025, September 18). Social media ban trial data reveals racial bias in age checking software: Just how inaccurate is it? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/sep/19/how-accurate-are-age-checks-for-australias-under-16s-social-media-ban-what-trial-data-reveals

Liu, Z. (2025). How Allowing a Little Bit of Dissent Helps Control Social Media: Impact of Market Structure on Censorship Compliance. Journal of the European Economic Association. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvaf018.

Panek, E., Mollen, S., & Cascio, C. (2025). Editorial: Perceived social norms and how they relate to online media. Frontiers in Psychology, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1568119.

Taylor, J. (2025, September 22). From zero to neo-Nazis: What under-16s may see under Australia’s social media ban, simply by not logging in. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/sep/22/under-16s-may-still-see-gambling-violent-far-right-content-under-australia-social-media-ban-simply-by-not-logging-in-zero-neo-nazis

Zhou, X. (2020). Policy Enforcement for Secure and Trustworthy Data Sharing in Multi-domain Infrastructures. 2020 IEEE 14th International Conference on Big Data Science and Engineering (BigDataSE), 104-113. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigDataSE50710.2020.00022.