Reynold Macpherson: A Social Media Ban May Solve the Wrong Problem

New Zealand’s proposed ban on social media for people under 16 starts from a serious concern. Children can be harmed online. They can be exposed to bullying, sexual material, grooming, misinformation and extreme content.

Social media can also disrupt sleep, concentration, learning and family life. Some platforms are designed to hold attention for as long as possible. Young people are especially vulnerable to those techniques.

Perspective with Heather du Plessis-Allan: This Meta outcome could be more efficient than a social media ban

Listen, if you somehow find yourself weirdly unconvinced that social media is bad for kids, just take a look at what Facebook and Instagram have done. It's huge.

Without actually admitting that kids get addicted to social media, they have effectively admitted it by promising to make changes to their platforms designed to break that addiction.

Perspective with Heather du Plessis-Allan: Here's why I'm more optimistic about the social media ban

I think I'm probably more optimistic about the social media ban than most people. I do accept that the thing is not going to work, according to the accepted definition of what it means to work, but I think it will work for enough people for it to, in my mind, work - if you follow what I'm saying.

John Ogilvie: Protecting Children or Controlling the Narrative?

It’s been six months since the Albanese Government introduced the social media ban for people under the age of 16. This law was sold to the public as a necessary measure to keep children safe from the dangers of social media. They told us that it would usher in a golden age where kids would go no longer be stuck on their devices and would go outside and socialise just like they did in the pre-Internet days. And of course, we were assured that this had nothing to do with protecting the legacy media or controlling the narrative online.

David Harvey: Stanford's Crusade

Policy, Passion and Restricting Access to Social Media

Introduction

The Herald’s front page for 22 July 2026 left nothing to interpretation: “I’m standing up for kids against insidious tech,” Erica Stanford declared. The timing was convenient. The article arrived hard on the heels of the paper’s own “Under the Influence” series — an unashamed, unapologetic piece of advocacy about how social media is said to be harming our youth.

David Farrar: Ban social media or smartphones for under 16s?

Stuff reports:

ACT leader David Seymour is pondering introducing a ban on children having their own smartphones.

The National Party is trying to ban kids from social media, but its coalition partners – including ACT – have indicated they won’t support that move. Instead, Seymour is now suggesting a different ban to solve the issue.

Kerre Woodham: Is it better to ban smartphones or police social media?

The ACT Party's not really a “ban” sort of a party. I've always thought they supported the idea of letting people go to hell in their own way. If you want to make your own decisions, fill your boots – if they're bad ones, live with the consequences. And perhaps they do still support the idea of adults going to hell in their own way, but not when it comes to kids.

Leader David Seymour did not support the National Party ban getting kids off social media. They've said that's a dumb idea, there's no way you can police the internet. But what David Seymour has proposed is a total ban on smartphones for under 16-year-olds.

Ryan Bridge: National needs Labour's support on its social media bill

Where is National's social media bill at?

We know Seymour doesn't like it. Winston is apparently has reservations with the wording, though that's only according to Stuff, rather than the man himself.

Labour might need to step in and save the day by supporting it from across the aisle.

David Harvey: Online Media Regulation - Continued

On Friday 15 May 2026, after a debate in Parliament, Minister Erica Stanford announced that the Bill introduced that would restrict access by under 16’s to certain social media platforms would be “paused”.

There was some discussion about whether or not this could in fact be done unilaterally. The Bill is on the agenda and to stop Parliament voting on the bill, the Government would have to rely on Opposition MPs agreeing to an 11th hour change to Parliament’s agenda.

But the reason for the “pause” is interesting and concerning. Stanford’s office said:

Kerre Woodham: Are parents restricting their kids' online access?

 

The Government is doing its bit to protect children from themselves by banning the use of smartphones during the school day and by moving to bring in legislation restricting social media use for children under 16. The schools are doing their bit, although it's more mopping up than prevention, by bringing in counsellors to help children, some as young as eight, who've been exposed to extreme online content.

David Lillis: Banning Social Media to Younger Teenagers?

New Zealand has a Problem

Recently, Peter Williams has commented on Australia's social media ban for under-16s (Williams, 2025) and Joanna Grey has expressed her own views on the problem in New Zealand (Grey, 2026). Unfortunately, the results of online harassment of young people can be extreme; for example, see Leask (2024). The comments posted on a related website to Leask’s article provide very disturbing but compelling reading (Reddit, 2024), and here I reproduce several of those comments. Please read them in full.

Joanna Gray: The Social Media Ban for Under-16s Illuminates Our Erroneous Thinking About Children

Is a potential social media ban for the under-16s the ultimate nanny state interference, the beginning of a full-blown censorship state, or a sensible decision to protect tech-addled children? It is probably all of the above. More uncomfortably, it throws much needed light on society’s misunderstanding about what it is to be a child, and even worse, parental neglect on a scale no-one is really prepared to admit.

Perspective with Ryan Bridge: We're not solving the big problems, and we don't want to

I’ve had it with people running around pretending we’re going to solve big global problems.

Australia’s banning kids from social media on Wednesday. They’re going to lead the world.

Sounds very appealing. Stop the brain rot, etc.

DTNZ, Social media ban for under-16s to begin before Christmas as petition gains momentum

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has confirmed the government’s plan to introduce legislation before Christmas to ban under-16s from accessing social media, signalling his strong support for age verification requirements.

Perspective with Heather du Plessis-Allan: We need the teen social media ban, because the companies won't enforce it

I've got an update for you on the social media ban for kids situation - over in Australia, the social media companies have now admitted they can kick underage kids off their platforms, and they've admitted that they will start enforcing the ban when the ban in Australia comes into effect on December 10th.

Damien Grant: Banning under 16s from social media will prove popular. Foolish ideas often are

The perverse outcomes resulting from adults seeking to protect children range from the mildly idiotic prevalence of Gripe Water to the morally questionable failure to challenge the prevalence of puberty blockers.

Last week our current Prime Minister and the MP for Tukituki (Hastings), Catherne Wedd, added to this list with a proposal to prevent those under 16 from accessing social media.

Zoran Rakovic - Operation Bubblewrap: Parliament Declares War on Teenagers

Let it be known: the greatest threat to our nation's future is no longer inflation, climate change, or potholes on State Highway 1. No, it’s 14-year-olds with TikTok accounts.

The other day, Member’s Bill Ballot Cake Tin became richer – a Social Media (Age-Restricted Users) Bill was submitted.  A name which, like most things coming out of Wellington these days, sounds like it was generated by a mildly concussed AI intern on a sugar crash.

Perspective with Heather du Plessis-Allan: We should consider following Australia in a social media ban

I reckon we might want to consider doing what Australia's planning to do and banning the kids from using social media until they’re 16.

Now at the moment, we don’t have a huge amount of detail on what's being proposed, but we do know that the Australians are planning to put in the highest age limit in the world.

And then put the onus on social media companies to make this work, not parents or kids, or even the Government.

Dr Bryce Edwards: Big tech’s political influence on debate and public watchdogs

The charity Netsafe is increasingly regarded as New Zealand’s “internet police”, or at least the leading authority on everything related to regulation and the dangers of the internet. It’s a well-deserved reputation, but there are also questions about whether they are being tainted by their financial reliance on big tech companies.