Thrown in the Deep End: Why Boomers Shouldn’t Be Making the Rules for Young People Online

Living by the coast in Australia, my Saturday mornings often include watching surfers and paddleboarders far out in the waves.

They take risks, but they’re prepared - taught to respect the ocean, spot dangers, and rely on safety measures like shark patrols and lifesavers. Children learn these skills early through swimming lessons and programs like VACSWIM, as well as from within the surf community. The ocean, after all, is not just a place of risk but a source of immense beauty, joy, and connection.

And yet, tragic accidents do happen. Drownings and shark attacks, as rare as they are, serve as brutal reminders of these risks.

But people don’t stop going into the sea because of them. Instead, these tragedies deepen our respect for the ocean and highlight the need for awareness and preparedness.

Now, imagine banning children from the ocean entirely until they turn sixteen.

No paddling, no exposure, no education.

Then, on their sixteenth birthday, taking them out to sea and tossing them into the deep water.

It’s unthinkable, right?

Yet this is precisely what the rushed social media restrictions for under-16s feel like to me.

The proposal, introduced with just a single day for public input, seems to have skipped the most important voices: children and young people.

Reports suggest no young people participated in the parliamentary hearings.

How can we expect to create meaningful solutions without involving those directly affected?

If young people aren’t at the table, how can they shape the decisions that impact their digital lives?

Young people have perspectives we need to hear. In fact, they are often the ones I speak to who make the most sense! They understand the nuances of social media in ways that many adults, including policymakers, simply do not.

To quote Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young , "What we've witnessed this week is boomers trying to tell young people how the internet should work." I loved hearing her say this! It's the ultimate example of the wrong people being at the all-powerful decision-making table.

What young people lack in lived years, they make up for in lived experience. By excluding them, we lose valuable insight into how to address issues like online safety, bullying, and mental health effectively.

This isn’t just about rules - it’s also about sending a message.

By removing teens from social media, we’re essentially telling them their voices don’t matter and their communities don’t belong. Social media is where many teens connect, share, and grow. Locking them out severs access to their peers, their platforms for expression, and their sense of belonging in the digital age.

This isn’t to downplay the real challenges of social media - bullying, harmful content, and algorithmic traps are undeniable issues. But blanket bans sidestep the opportunity to teach young people how to navigate social media safely and responsibly.

Like the ocean, social media is a force to be respected, not feared. Helping young people understand its risks and benefits - through their active participation in shaping solutions - would prepare them far better than locking them out entirely.

In my own bubble of conversations, I’ve yet to meet anyone who thinks this is the right approach. For now, I’ll be watching how this unfolds with great interest.

But I can’t shake the feeling that the government, in its haste, has made a misstep - one that risks leaving our young people dangerously unprepared for the digital world they’re already swimming in.