Kids Are Still Scrolling — and Big Tech Is Cashing In

Adobe Stock

Children and teenagers have become one of the most valuable audiences in the digital economy. They set trends, spend hours scrolling and often remain loyal to platforms for years making them highly sought after users in an advertising-driven industry.

Mia’s name has been changed with parental consent to protect her identity.

Thirteen-year-old Mia says she expected Australia’s new social-media rules to change how that world looks. When the restrictions were announced, she thought she knew what was coming.

“I was honestly quite sad because those apps I used every day,” she says. “I use them a lot. But I understood where the government was coming from, there’s so much bullying and stuff like that.”

Mia, whose name has been changed to protect her identity did not dismiss the policy outright. She recognised the intention behind it: to shield children from harm. But weeks after the rules took effect, she says the reality has not matched what she expected.

“When I heard about the ban I thought it would mean that no one could go on social media anymore,” she explains. “But what really happened? Nothing really happened, to be honest.” Mia says she has not seen restrictions applied to children in her circles or even to herself.

“I noticed that no one was getting banned. Only the older people were getting banned, which I found quite ironic, because it’s supposed to be the opposite. It wasn’t really affecting any of my friends, not even me.” In some ways, that has brought relief. “Well, it makes me feel sort of good,” she admits. “Because I’m not banned yet.”

But it has also left her questioning whether the policy is addressing the real problem. “I don’t think anything will happen. I think it would just be the same, because most of the bullying and stuff isn’t even online,” she says. “It can be on any app or not even online.”

Mia believes adults are trying to do the right thing. “I think the adults are trying to protect kids from inappropriate content, or scary things, or stuff that’s not meant for them,” she says. “Which I understand.” What she doubts is whether restrictions alone will make children safer.

“I really don’t think it will make a difference,” she says plainly.

She also points to how quickly young people adapt.

“No matter what you do, people are going to find a way around it. People are smart these days, and technology’s just getting better and better.”

If bans were introduced, she suspects many kids would find work-arounds.

“There’s so many social media platforms,” she says. “And you can just make a new account. It’s not that hard. People aren’t going to get stopped.”

Platforms, profit and young users

The ban shifts responsibility onto companies to prevent under-16s holding accounts rather than relying on children to self-declare their age.

That shift carries economic consequences. Children and teenagers are a highly valuable audience for social media companies. They spend large amounts of time on platforms, shape online trends and often remain loyal users into adulthood, fueling long-term advertising revenue.

Critics argue that advertising driven business models reward growth and engagement, creating tension between protecting minors and maximising time spent on screens. They question why more stringent safeguards were not introduced earlier, given repeated warnings from researchers and regulators.

Technology companies say they are investing heavily in safety systems and face significant compliance costs, including age-verification tools, moderation teams and regulatory oversight. But advocates maintain the laws represent a belated attempt to curb an industry that has long profited from youth attention.

Between policy and practice

For companies built on capturing attention, children remain a prized audience.

With enforcement lagging and many young users reporting little disruption, the slow pace of change may be quietly welcome inside boardrooms where growth depends on keeping eyes and thumbs on screens.

Mia’s experience suggests the fight over who ultimately controls access to that audience is far from settled.