Overnight, around half a million accounts on Meta’s social media platforms Facebook and Instagram vanished in Australia.

It’s not just Meta. An estimated 440,000 Snapchat accounts are gone. As are 200,000 Australians from TikTok.

That’s because Australia’s world first social media ban for under 16s came into place early this morning.

There are doubts about how effective the new restrictions will be. But there’s no doubt other nations, including the US, are taking notice.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel – a Democrat who is reportedly considering a presidential run in 2028 – is among those to praise the ban, calling on his own country “to step up its game and do the same”.

“Parents have been battling big Tech all alone. They need a helping hand to protect their kids,” Mr Emanuel wrote on X.

“TikTok, Instagram and the rest are too addictive, too dangerous, and target our kids too often. We’ve studied and debated what to do long enough to know what’s right. Now we need the strength to say enough is enough and to act.”

In the UK, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Keir Starmer told the BBC his government has “no current plans” to follow suit.

“We understand parents’ concern about impact of social media on children, which is why we have taken some of the boldest steps globally to ensure online content is genuinely age appropriate,” the spokesperson said.

“There are no current plans to implement a smartphone or social media ban for children. It’s important we protect children while letting them benefit safely from the digital world without cutting off essential services or isolating the most vulnerable.”

British Labour MP Jess Asato, however, has called on Sir Keir to follow Australia’s lead.

“Children deserve to have the best start in life, and that means growing up away from social media,” Ms Asato said last week.

“We’ve got to ask, ‘Is it a coincidence that as children’s lives have moved more online, children’s mental health has suffered?’”

‘This is a world-leading move’

Making the ban stick is no easy task. One study showed 96 per cent of Australian children between the ages of 10 and 15 were on some form of social media. And while not all sites will be banned, it could nonetheless mean around one million accounts are affected.

The government has said some social media platforms carry too much risk of exposing to harmful content, bullying or even being groomed by adults.

“This is a world-leading move by Australia and it is a change driven, overwhelmingly, by Australian parents,” Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wrote in an opinion piece on the subject, published by news.com.au.

He added that he’d had “the sombre experience of meeting with mums and dads who have seen their child’s wellbeing crushed by the worst of social media, many living with the devastating pain of losing a child”.

“We’re doing this for those parents – and for every parent. Because this law is about making it easier for you to have a conversation with your child about the risks and harms of engaging online”.

Sign US giants panicking over Aussie move

Groundbreaking laws that Australia has put in place first have a habit of spreading overseas. Just like plain cigarette packaging which is now in 25 nations following Australia’s 2012 introduction.

Countries as geographically diverse as Denmark and Malaysia are looking at similar bans.

Australia’s ban is causing waves in the US too.

Instagram has flooded ad breaks and social media with commercials for its “teen accounts” for 13-17 year olds. They claim to allow more parental supervisions, have time limits and can restrict content.

Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram, said of the teen accounts: “We want parents to feel good about their teens using social media”.

While an Australia level ban is not generally being considered in the US, some states have floated the idea. Instagram’s ads appear to be a concerted effort to persuade parents that it’s not needed before the idea gets a head of steam.

In Australia, social media platforms are – grudgingly – abiding by the teen restrictions.

TikTok and Snap have opposed the ban and YouTube’s owner Alphabet said it was considering a legal challenge. Social media companies have said children could find their way onto more obscure social media sites with even fewer safeguards in place.

X owner Elon Musk has said the ban “seems like a backdoor way to control access to the internet by all Australians”. Of all the platforms on the adults’ only list, X has been the vaguest on what policies it would put in place to meet the requirements.

“I’ve always referred to this as the first domino, which is why they pushed back,” eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, who regulates online safety as Australia’s, said at an event in Sydney last week.

Other sites which come under the ban are Kick, Reddit, Threads, Twitch and YouTube.

However, eSafety has also stated that a number of sites that could be considered to be social media will be allowed to be used by kids. These include messaging services such as WhatsApp, Discord and Messenger, age appropriate sites like YouTube Kids and Lego Play, game creation platform Roblox as well as Pinterest which is focused on craft.

Bluesky, an alternative to X, is not on the list of banned platforms for teens. However, it has said it would also ban the 50,000 under 16s who currently were signed up.

Ban’s effect questioned

But the jury is out on how effective the ban will be in practice with the PM candidly stating “we’ve acknowledged this process won’t be 100 per cent perfect”.

Mr Albanese compared it to laws restricting alcohol: “The fact that teenagers occasionally find a way to have a drink doesn’t diminish the value of having a clear, national standard”.

Indeed, the wording of the amendment to the Online Safety Act which has brought in the ban means that under 16s and parents won’t be at fault if younger teens somehow continue to use affected social media sites. But the companies that own the sites could have to pay fines of up to $49.5 million if they don’t take “reasonable steps” to keep kids off.

But “reasonable steps” is vague enough that so long as big tech firms put a few safeguards in place, such as attempting to check a user’s age, then they may avoid a fine even if some younger teens remain online.

But the fine of $49.5 million is seen as not much of a deterrent by some critics.

“It takes Meta about an hour and 52 minutes to make $A50 million in revenue,” former Facebook executive Stephen Scheeler told AAP.

How firms will check ages varies including examining selfies, uploading government IDs or bank account information. The length of time social media accounts have been opened could also indicate someone’s age.

If an adult inadvertently gets kicked off a platform, showing ID or even doing a selfie should allow them back on.

The Government has not ruled out banning further platforms amid signs teens are already migrating to social media sites not on the list.

Mr Albanese said the ban should reduce stresses on children and mums and dads.

“From December 10, Australian kids will have more time to be kids and Australian parents will have greater peace of mind,” said Mr Albanese.

“The courage of all those parents who have fought for this ban will change lives – and it will save lives.