On December 10, the world's attention turned to Australia as it implemented the first-ever ban on social media use for individuals under the age of 16. While it is too early to judge the success of this decision in improving the lives and protecting the youth, its initial effects have become clear, sparking widespread debate on social and humanitarian levels globally. With the ban's enforcement, many teenagers have shared their personal experiences and concerns about the consequences of this decision. However, changing social behavior does not happen overnight; it is more of a marathon than a sprint. Past experiences, such as laws on speed limits, drink-driving, or smoking bans, have shown that public resistance is often the first step towards long-term positive change. In this context, Australia's social media ban can be seen as an emergency measure to halt the degradation of a digital system on the brink of explosion, and as a clear warning signal to tech companies about new limits to tolerance if they continue to neglect the protection of young users. Online safety activists in the UK and other countries are closely monitoring the reactions of tech companies to regulations that do not go as far as a complete ban. As a large number of children and teenagers spend time on their phones equivalent to, or sometimes exceeding, the time they spend in school, it has become essential for tech companies to realize that governments will not tolerate any future negligence. These companies must also understand that spending long hours daily on these platforms can lead to addiction and the resulting psychological and physical problems, threatening the health of teenagers and negatively impacting their life path and future. While some countries are considering implementing a similar ban, others have chosen a different approach, attempting to make digital platforms safer for young people. Critics of the ban argue that it may drive young people to unregulated platforms or to find ways to circumvent the laws. Among these testimonies is that of Ezra Shaul, a 15-year-old boy suffering from quadriplegia, who said that preventing him from using social media would increase his sense of isolation and disconnection from the world. These testimonies highlight the importance of involving young people themselves in discussions about their digital future and the need for countries to consider the varying impacts of these laws on children and teenagers depending on their circumstances and abilities. Nevertheless, fears about children feeling isolated should not be used as a pretext to downplay the importance of this new regulation or delay it. Young people have a right to feel angry and resentful, especially as social media and smartphones have become an integral part of their daily lives, making their restriction seem like a violation of their accustomed reality. However, allowing these platforms to spread without constraints in the pursuit of profit was a regulatory mistake from the beginning, and clear boundaries should have been set before they became so deeply embedded in the lives of the younger generation. While countries like Malaysia, Denmark, and Brazil are considering a similar ban, others, including the UK, have opted for a different approach aimed at trying to make digital platforms safer for young people before resorting to a complete ban. However, the effectiveness of this approach is still questionable, especially given the continued existence of technological features designed to promote addiction, such as infinite scroll, which pushes users to spend hours in front of screens, and variable reward systems, making these platforms more akin to non-stop slot machines. The danger of these features has reached a level that has prompted the state of California to plan to limit teenagers' exposure to so-called 'addictive content' to one hour per day, unless parents give special permission, while there are currently no similar restrictions in the UK. The Australian experience is expected to form a case study of great importance, contributing to research that has long faced difficulties in proving the direct causal relationship between social media use and its impact on mental health. In turn, critics of the ban argue that it may drive young people to unregulated platforms or to find ways to circumvent the laws. These concerns are reinforced by evidence from the UK, where a significant increase in the use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) was observed following the implementation of the Online Safety Act.
