On December 10, 2025, Australia’s social media age-restriction law officially came into effect, restricting young people under the age of 16 from accessing 10 popular platforms: TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Threads, X, Snapchat, Twitch, Kick, Reddit and YouTube.
The restrictions, which were passed in the Senate in November 2024, aim to protect young Australians from pressures and risks that users can be exposed to while logged in to social media accounts.
While four in five Aussie adults support the ban, debate continues to rage as to how effective it will be.
Professor Daswin De Silva, Professor of AI and Analytics and Director of AI Strategy at La Trobe University, says the ban’s biggest limitation is “the absence of a regulating/governing body and the onus on social media companies to set up age-assurance methods to satisfy the law.”
The Federal Government concedes age verification is complex but says it has responded by placing responsibility on platforms, backing the rollout with guidance, enforcing penalties to drive compliance, and committing to review and refine the laws over time.
Stacey Edmonds is a social scientist, teacher, learning designer and deepfake safety specialist who has spent two decades working at the intersection of technology, education and human behaviour.
Today she leads Lively, the learning agency behind The Cyber Safety Game Dodgy or Not? for schools and communities and Phishy or Not? for organisations. Her work now features in classrooms, boardrooms and national policy conversations on scams, online safety and AI.
Below, The Educator speaks to Edmonds about how schools can shift from reactive digital policies to proactive safety education, support teachers and parents through this change, and embed simple, repeatable routines that empower students to respond to online risks with confidence.
TE: What does the social media ban for under 16s mean for schools in 2026?
It means treating digital safety as a core capability, not a one-off program. By 2026, schools will need to move away from reactive assemblies and platform-specific rules, and focus instead on skills students can use anywhere. That includes recognising social engineering tactics like urgency, secrecy and pressure, and practising clear actions they can execute under stress.
TE: What actually changes in classrooms now that the ban has taken effect?
Less content, more practice. Short, repeatable scenarios embedded across subjects and year levels. One simple thinking prompt, “Is it dodgy or not?”, helps students pause and assess risk. From there, routines matter: save evidence, block, report, tell a trusted adult. These skills need to be revisited regularly, not taught once and forgotten.
TE: What does this mean for teachers?
Teachers shouldn’t be expected to be digital safety experts overnight. Most are learning alongside their students in a fast-changing environment. Schools that succeed will support staff with shared language, ready-to-use scenarios, and light-touch professional learning that fits into existing workloads.
TE: Why does every school need a digital lead?
Because consistency matters. Many fee-paying schools already have a Digital Learning Lead or team who can update content quickly, coach staff, and keep learning current across the year. Public schools need the same role to avoid patchy delivery and reliance on individual confidence.
TE: What about parents?
Parents need reassurance and tools, not blame. Just because kids are home doesn’t mean they’re “at home” online. Schools should support calm, regular conversations with parents, using the same language and steps students are learning, so everyone is reinforcing the same messages.
TE: How should schools measure success?
Not by attendance or completion rates. Look for behaviour change: earlier reporting, increased confidence, students being able to explain why something felt wrong, and knowing what to do next. As Albert Bandura reminds us, “a capability is only as good as its execution”.