If you use the internet, you probably use social media too. In Australia, though, that might be about to change. The Albanese government has proposed a minimum age limit for all social media platforms, which is slated to be introduced by the end of 2024.
The ban, which would see social media use restricted for all young Australians (mostly likely those aged under 16), has bipartisan support. The official press release also references a ban for ‘other relevant digital platforms’, which has sparked speculation that games with communication features – like Roblox and Fortnite – could also be targeted.
Exactly how the ban will be enforced remains unclear. The most likely mechanism: have an independent age assurance provider use double-blind tokens to verify user ages. That would keep sensitive user data separate from the social media platform in question.
What Does the Proposed Ban Mean for Brands?
At first glance, a social media ban looks toothless – the kind of hollow legislation that won’t deliver its intended outcome. After all, Facebook, Instagram, Roblox, and many other digital platforms already have age verification features, and they don’t seem to work.
If Australia moves forward with a double-blind tokenised approach, though, it could have serious implications for brands that advertise to children and young people. A single assurance provider means that a relatively high level of personal ID could be required, making it harder for children to fake or lie their way onto platforms. That could also make it much easier for the federal government to force smaller social platforms to comply with regulations. And, if the ban does work as intended, many B2C brands will be cut off from a key demographic: under 16s.
For the purposes of this article, under 16s fall into 2 categories: children (ages 5 to 11) and young people (ages 12 to 15).
Direct Implications of a Social Media Ban
Once the ban is in force, anyone under 16 will likely lose access to relevant social media and gaming accounts. All paid, organic and influencer marketing that targets that demographic will basically stop working overnight.
While most brands don’t sell directly to under 16s per se, children and young people do drive purchase decisions. Parents normally buy the games, toys, clothes, food and experiences that their children want. Without the ability to influence under 16s on socials, brands will need to make a hard pivot to other platforms – think streaming tiers like Disney+ Standard.
Exactly what that will mean depends on where children and young people go. If YouTube remains accessible, it would be a natural home for brands to migrate to. Given that it’s social media by all legislative definitions, though, it’s likely to be on the list of restricted platforms. (It’s also quite possible that YouTube will just disable ‘social’ features, like Shorts, comments, and sharing functions, for accounts under 16.)
Instead, we can probably expect to a) see a big increase in non-social digital channels (such as advertising on children- and youth-related sites and apps) and b) more partnerships with organisations (like sporting clubs) that already engage with young people and children. Youth marketing will swing away from the kind of highly granular, low-cost playbooks that work on social media to riskier, more expensive initiatives.
We’ll also probably see an inversion of the child-influences-parent dynamic. Instead, it’s probable that – particularly with essentials like food and clothing – brands will double down on targeting parents.
Effect on Brand Awareness
Social media has democratised influence – and that’s largely been a good thing. Startups and SMB brands don’t need to have big budgets and sophisticated marketing motions to get seen. They can create good social content, build online communities, and slowly flourish.
If social media is banned, though, that effect will largely disappear for under-16 markets. Instead, the ball will be back in the court of large incumbents and distributors. New brands will either have to invest heavily in building their own, non-social ecosystems or partner with other organisations that already have those connections. Virality and word of mouth will become even more important in building awareness among younger audiences.
Long-Term Behavioural Consequences
The short-term consequences of a ban are the most relevant to brands … but the long-term ones are much more interesting. What happens if children grow up without social media? How will it affect their behaviours later in life?
The last generation to reach 16 without having access to some kind of social media were Gen Xers (the first social networking platform came out in 1997). The world has changed dramatically since then. Will Generations Alpha and Beta be more focused on other digital technologies like Google? Will they be less digitally influenced altogether? Or will they hit 16 and glut themselves on the array of newly accessible platforms?
The honest answer: no-one knows. We’ll just have to wait and see.
When Could the Social Media Ban Be Implemented?
Let’s assume the Bill for the social media ban goes to the House of Representatives in November this year. Because the actual ban has bipartisan support – the debate will probably be over implementation – it could be passed in 2 or 3 months. For the sake of argument, let’s say it’s enacted in February 2025.
The Act will need to be accompanied by regulations and a rollout period, which we can optimistically estimate at 6 months. That means there’s a good chance we could see the ban in force by July or August next year.
Takeaways for Brands
No-one has a crystal ball. Everything we’ve discussed in this article is speculative. If the proposed social media ban does pass, we don’t know what form it will take or which platforms will be included. We don’t know how effective it will be or if the targeted platforms will comply. And we definitely don’t know how children and young people will react.
But 2 things are clear:
- A Bill for a social media age limit of some kind is going before Parliament this year, and it will probably pass.
- Brands whose customer bases include Australian children and young people should be looking at their options.
In a previous article, we talked about the need to diversify your marketing distribution channels, regardless of how the ban plays out. It’s no different to investing. The less reliant you are on a single source of revenue, the less vulnerable you are if and when something impacts that source.
So keep building communities among under 16s on social media. Keep partnering with big youth influencers. Nothing’s happened yet. But, at the same time, start allocating some budget to innovation. Trial other channels (digital and analogue). Maybe test the viability of creating your own ecosystem.
And, above all, focus on building brand affinity. If and when a ban comes, you need loyal audiences to follow you to a new home – wherever that is.
