It makes an incredulous old bastard like myself suspect that this really isn't about nurturing and protecting children at all.

If I was cynical, I'd say that Zuck and Meta and Microsoft want to know exactly who's clicking so they can charge more for targeted advertising and that local, state, and federal cops want even more specific results to their subpoenas.

And the kids that have made friends from all over the world on social media,because people don't care if they are disabled, or what they look like. Unlike the kids that bully them at school.

Us introverts, who found it hard to talk to people, but thrive with a keyboard and that extra time to create the right sentences?

Or the rural kids, that don't have friends nearby?

Or the kids that have family overseas or far away, that they were keeping in touch with via social media?

Or kids that get information in their native language and follow events in their home countries.

The kids running businesses on social media, gaining life skills?

Or the kids following their heros, gaining information, having mental health and other medical organisations they can easily reach out to?

Kids taking leadership and running environmental, social, volunteer groups, promoting their bands, running events, and coaching others?

Adults making decisions have no idea how kids use social media, let alone how it benifits or harms them.

The Australian u16 ban was pushed by an advertising company and 32 global brands.

Did not care about kids, just wanted them back watching tv and radio, so they could consume advertising they controled.

They also owned AI age verification software to sell.

https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/12/09/36-months-teen-social-media-ban-big-tech-brands/