Originally published: Mi3, 2 December 2025
A recent study by Pureprofile, conducted in October 2025, surveyed over 800 parents, teachers, and young Australians to gauge opinions on the proposed social media ban for individuals under 16 years of age. The findings reveal a complex landscape of support and scepticism surrounding the ban’s potential impact.
The study indicates that 73% of Australians are in favour of the under-16 social media ban. However, 74% express doubts about its effectiveness, with 68% believing that children will find ways to circumvent the restrictions. Teachers emerge as the most supportive group, with 84% backing the ban, yet only 20% believe it will be effective. Among high school teachers, support rises to 91%, but confidence in the ban’s efficacy drops to 13%.
Parents also show significant support, with 75% in favour of the ban. Nevertheless, only 31% of parents believe it will work, while 67% suspect that children will bypass the restrictions. A teacher respondent commented, “Bullying is rife in schools… the ban will hopefully stop children under 16 accessing inappropriate sites.”
The study further explores perceptions of responsibility, with 42% of Australians identifying parents as the first line of defence. There is an expectation for social media platforms and the government to share this responsibility. Additionally, 46% of Australians advocate for a hybrid approach, combining restrictions with educational measures, rather than relying solely on punitive actions.
Content on social media is perceived as a more significant concern than the amount of time spent online. Half of the respondents believe content poses a greater issue for children’s wellbeing. Among young adults aged 16-24, 57% view content as the most significant influence on under-16s, compared to 24% who cite screen time.
The potential benefits of the ban are also highlighted, with more than 70% of Australians believing it will encourage children to engage more in-person, be more active, and reduce bullying. However, concerns are raised about the ban’s possible negative impacts on support for children in areas such as mental health, LGBTQIA+, and neurodiversity groups. There is also apprehension about isolating children with disabilities or those living in rural areas.
Regarding alternative activities, 32% of children aged 8-15 report they would replace social media with other online activities, such as playing video games or watching TV and movies. Meanwhile, 37% indicate they would spend more time with friends, playing sports, or engaging in outdoor activities.
CEO of Pureprofile, Martin Filz, commented, “While every group in the study shares the same core intention of protecting children’s wellbeing, their definitions of what safety looks like – and how freedom should coexist with it – diverge.” Filz further noted, “Despite different routes, every group agrees that the end goal is emotional, social and mental wellbeing. That moral alignment is the ‘common ground’ uniting them.”
Download the full ‘Australia’s Under 16’s Social Media Ban’ report here >
