AP

            On 10 December 2025 the Australian government brought in age restrictions for those wishing to use social media – the age being sixteen. Predictably, there were outcries of ‘Censorship’, and defences along the lines of ‘We need to protect youngsters from Big Tech and online bullying.’ Since then, Keir Starmer, the now former Prime Minister of the UK, has presented himself as a protector of children, and announced his intention to even further than the Australian legislation. France, Germany, Denmark, Poland, Portugal, Norway, Turkey, Greece, Indonesia, Malaysia, India and New Zealand are travelling down the same path.  

There would be few people less equipped to comment on this kind of law than myself: I have no children under sixteen at home; the world of social media reminds me of how the African slave, Olaudah Equiano felt when he first came across a book – he spoke to it a few times, and waited for it to answer him;[1] I suspect the motives of all involved; and my guess is that youngsters much cleverer than I will find a way around the law.

The Communications Minister, Anika Wells, assured us, on 1 April be it said, that the social ban was working.[2] There is strong anecdotal evidence that the ban is proving to be less than comprehensive. Ask any youngster under sixteen.

Still, everybody is supposed to have an opinion on this. Social media, of course, can be used for good, but it can also be used for pornography, violence, and social isolation. Mental and physical health are at risk; we are being threatened with what has been called ‘neo-idiocy’. In an age of communication overload, there are fewer healthy connections with other people. What Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff called ‘safetyism’ does not necessarily make for safety.

Should we trust teenagers to make good decisions?

Every time I see a group of teenagers together, they are almost invariably scrolling through their phones rather than talking to one another. We are ‘scrolling ourselves to death’.[3] We live in a dangerous world of Influencers and over-rated celebrities. Marshall Ballantine-Jones has set out some compelling reasons for a curbing of teenage access to social media – or social media access to teenagers. He writes that the ban is actually a delay, not a ban; it is about protection, not restricting freedom; ages 12-16 are a vulnerable developmental window; there are age limits for risky behaviours such as smoking and driving; teen mental-health issues skyrocketed since the onset of social media; and Big Tech intentionally targets children.

Emma Corby, the fourteen-year-old daughter of motoring journalist, Stephen Corby, actually thanked her father in print for his wisdom in approving the ban.[4] Stories across families will vary, but there will be good outcomes in some places.

So, does this mean that we should trust teenagers to make good decisions? The answer is ‘Of course not.’ Teenagers share in original sin. We know. Most of you reading this will have been teenagers.

Should we trust Big Tech to have our best interests at heart?

Platforms like Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, TikTok, Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) would be expected to use age-verification checks on potential users. In the Australian legislation, any failure in this regard is liable to a fine of up to $50,000,000. Apparently, this has not proved successful, so the government has moved that it be doubled.

Peter Kreeft called Facebook ‘the most insufferably egotistical enterprise and the biggest waste of time in human history.’ Depending on one’s immediate experience, that might be regarded as a little jaundiced or perhaps too soft. Big Tech is a money-making enterprise, and it has been quick to flood the internet with digital rubbish. It has almost made television seem comparatively harmless. Technology is not exactly neutral, and nor are the corporations behind social media.

Should we trust Big Tech? As with teenagers, the answer is ‘Of course not.’

Should we trust governments to legislate in a way as to promote faith, freedom and family?

Once personal liberty has been lost through legislation, it is not easy to recapture it. Often it is not parents who are empowered; rather, they are controlled by a growing surveillance by governments and an already bloated bureaucracy.  President Joe Biden, with or without dementia, told a group of public school teachers in 2022 that children belong to the whole community. It is the sort of sentiment which ought to strike concern in the heart of any parent. Someone with the title of ‘eSafety Commissioner’ reeks of Orwellian satire.

             Should we trust governments to legislate in a way as to promote faith, freedom and family? There is a first time for everything, but this looks unlikely. A kind of digital totalitarianism looks more of a possibility. Governments warn us against misinformation, but they thrive on it.

Where does this leave us?

The most obvious answer would be: ‘With another illustration of the book of Ecclesiastes. There is something wrong with everything under the sun.’ Since the Fall, one of the most glaring attributes of the world is our capacity for sin, and, says Matthew Henry, ‘the way of sin is downhill.’

This has ever been true after Genesis 3. In the late fourth century, Augustine’s close friend, Alypius, was dragged by some colleagues to a gladiatorial show, and, after a period of trying to close his eyes, felt unable to restrain himself from cheering. Such is the power of the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and the pride of life (1 John 2:16).

We all need to take sin seriously, be that in teenagers, parents, Big Tech, or governments. Too much reliance on the wisdom of any one group, inflamed by foolish talk of autonomy, will do much harm. Things may be lawful, but they ought not to master us (1 Cor.6:12). All of us need to make better use of the time God has given us on this earth; we should redeem the time (Eph.5:16).

‘Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honourable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.’ (Phil.4:8) There are no magic answers, only godly ones.

– Peter Barnes

[1] Olaudah Equiano, The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano or Gustavus Vassa, the African, ed. by Shelly Eversley, New York: The Modern Library, reprinted 2004, pp.50-51.

[2] ‘Wells denies social media ban failing’, The Australian, 1 April 2026.

[3] See Brett McCracken (ed), Scrolling Ourselves to Death, Wheaton: Crossway, 2025.

[4] Stephen Corby, ‘It’s Dad v Daughter in the Battle of the Ban’ in The Weekend Australian, Inquirer, February 7-8, 2026.