Teen social media shutdown begins as Meta’s early warning hits under-16s in Australia

Australian teens woke up this week to a shock as Meta began ‍sending early warnings that Instagram, Facebook and Threads accounts belonging to under-16 year olds will disappear. The move has arrived ahead of schedule, and there’s nothing quite like an early deadline to cue panic in a teen social media user. As Australia becomes the first nation to enforce such sweeping age limits on major social platforms, and with many other countries including the EU regulators considering similar policies, the world is watching closely to see not only how Australia’s regulators and Meta handle this transition, and how teens respond in the crucial days ahead.

At Raise we have spent this year working closely with under-16s to understand how they use social media and what a ban would mean to them. We ran focus groups, visited schools, carried out surveys, and we heard some surprising things, even to us. This insight matters now more than ever, as it helps us anticipate how young users might react when some of their social media suddenly disappears, and it shows us what could genuinely keep them safe online beyond simple age limits. There are important questions still unanswered as this major shift unfolds under the intense gaze of governments, parents, educators and platforms around the world. 

Firstly, let’s look at what’s happening and what is not: Nine apps will be banned for under-16s in Australia from December 10 or sooner depending on what each platform chooses to enforce. The initial group includes Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, X, Reddit, Roblox and Threads, while YouTube will be limited to viewing only for under-16s. For teens that like to use alternatives to all of the above, for now at least, it’s fair game.  

Timings of the teen bans will vary: Meta was last week already telling users that their accounts will be frozen if they are under-16 and that this could happen ahead of the December 10 deadline. Users have been told in messages from Meta that they are able to download their data, use WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger in the meantime, and also curiously confirm if they actually might be over 16 and thus continue using social media. 

This was the first of a number of fascinating insights we picked up at Raise this year working directly with teen social media users. They cited that ways they would continue using social media if they wanted to would include simply stating on their apps that they are over-16, as choosing one's age is a common method of starting off using a smartphone for a child. Other ways we were told in our research and focus groups included using a VPN to bypass Australian age limits by accessing from another country, using an adult’s phone as a burner phone, gaining parental permission, or simply using other social networks and apps that aren’t going to be banned, which includes messaging apps, which are used essentially like social media, and AI apps and systems from ChatGPT to Meta AI. 

What will be interesting to see here also is how inventive teen social media users may get with their online communities. Will they replicate their communities and social content sharing in Messenger, WhatsApp or Discord? Might Meta or another app platform innovate and create new safe spaces for teens online? Or might we find that this becomes a game of whack-a-mole and users spend more time on other types of apps altogether: we found in our research that the use of AI amongst under-16s could be considered even more prolific, time consuming and influential than social media. 

A potentially problematic area for the implementation of a teen social media ban is its enforcement, with the responsibility being passed on to the social networks themselves. With the Australian government not having passed a standard practice, some social networks may escape sanctions by paying lip service, and undermining the point of the change altogether. Monitoring, feedback and communicating what’s next will be important not only for Australia but for the many other countries considering a similar move. 

It will be vital to see, in the playing out of all teen online protection plans, whether the absence of social media even does anything positive in protecting users when there are so many digital options available to a teenager. One could argue that the time and attention would be better spent actually making social media safer, through functionality, algorithm changes, content bans and education. 

What comes next will be the real measure of progress. Australia has taken a bold step, but the outcome depends entirely on how young people adapt. If teens simply reroute their habits, and just find a way to do what they like to do, or perhaps just migrate to private channels or unregulated apps, then the protective intent of the ban may be lost. 

If instead this moment sparks a wider effort to build safer, smarter digital spaces, then something meaningful can emerge from the disruption. At Raise we believe that genuine protection cannot come from removal alone. It comes from understanding how teens live online, supporting them with the right tools and education, and ensuring the platforms they use are designed with their wellbeing in mind. Australia has opened a global conversation, and now it is up to all of us to shape what happens next.

If you would like to talk to us at Raise about any of the issues in this article, email us at team@raisegeneration.com.