My take is the whole Australia's ban on under 16 social media, and what PR companies are doing now by way of a lot of whining, is it isn't much different from my dim memory of the days when Google ran a campaign that they were unable to single out spam in results ... this was prior to 2015. Sad thing was powers that be in the end swallowed it right up and from there Google's search engine only got worse from there on out.
I don't think Australia has an problem with VPNs, however what the those working in govt have proposed for verification, a VPN would not make a real difference. [1] Honestly I do not recall any Australian govt plan to single them out, especially given I recall them being recommended by some in government over the years.
Lately what I have read is that any Australian sites that might require an age check, there's a preferred method [2] but given [3] google and microsoft have from December 27 2025 required age verified sign in for over 18 content - it lists a number of age verifying methods, however many would not be so appealing to those who guard their PII cautiously or preciously.
So getting back to Australia's social media ban for under 16 kids that seems to be the center of this article --
The simple question should be if the social media ban working in Australia - the obvious simple blunt answer is yes - talk to the parents and many are ecstatic about the ban and getting their kids off their phones. But if there was any question the answer for yes could be summed up as -- Sure kids will still be there, albeit to a lesser degree, but that isn't the win - what is the win is any bad incidents involving an under 16's social media content which is bullying or other low life BS which spills into a child taking their life or someone else's life or an accidental death due to some BS they were going to post for their 5 minutes of fame ... won't be happening without that particular social media company eventually taking a large financial hit, along with the parents or guardians if they helped or accepted it wasn't really an effective ban - they'll soon learn, yes it was. It turns out some people can be distracted by the fact some kids have worked their way around the ban, there was news of threats to double the fines ... but no, the first bad, life changing, courts involved, media worthy incident where it was clear the user was a primary school kid and the social media company miraculously had not been able to work that out, the whole rule of law idea will be very much seared into their behinds.
My take is the whole Australia's ban on under 16 social media, and what PR companies are doing now by way of a lot of whining, is it isn't much different from my dim memory of the days when Google ran a campaign that they were unable to single out spam in results ... this was prior to 2015. Sad thing was powers that be in the end swallowed it right up and from there Google's search engine only got worse from there on out.
I don't think Australia has an problem with VPNs, however what the those working in govt have proposed for verification, a VPN would not make a real difference. [1] Honestly I do not recall any Australian govt plan to single them out, especially given I recall them being recommended by some in government over the years.
Lately what I have read is that any Australian sites that might require an age check, there's a preferred method [2] but given [3] google and microsoft have from December 27 2025 required age verified sign in for over 18 content - it lists a number of age verifying methods, however many would not be so appealing to those who guard their PII cautiously or preciously.
So getting back to Australia's social media ban for under 16 kids that seems to be the center of this article -- The simple question should be if the social media ban working in Australia - the obvious simple blunt answer is yes - talk to the parents and many are ecstatic about the ban and getting their kids off their phones. But if there was any question the answer for yes could be summed up as -- Sure kids will still be there, albeit to a lesser degree, but that isn't the win - what is the win is any bad incidents involving an under 16's social media content which is bullying or other low life BS which spills into a child taking their life or someone else's life or an accidental death due to some BS they were going to post for their 5 minutes of fame ... won't be happening without that particular social media company eventually taking a large financial hit, along with the parents or guardians if they helped or accepted it wasn't really an effective ban - they'll soon learn, yes it was. It turns out some people can be distracted by the fact some kids have worked their way around the ban, there was news of threats to double the fines ... but no, the first bad, life changing, courts involved, media worthy incident where it was clear the user was a primary school kid and the social media company miraculously had not been able to work that out, the whole rule of law idea will be very much seared into their behinds.
[1] https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/docume... [pdf 2025 114 pages, in regard of age verification methods / trial ]
[2] arm's length third party and subsequent destruction of personal confirmation data with key or token issued.
[3] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-sear...