At the end of November, the Australian federal parliament adopted .
The details remain vague: we don’t have a complete list of which platforms will be subject to the legislation or what the ban will look like in practice. However, the government has indicated that trials of age-guarantee technologies will be central to its enforcement approach.
Video games and online gaming platforms are not included in Australia’s social media ban. But we can anticipate how enforcing an online ban might (not) work by examining China’s large-scale use of age verification technologies to restrict young people’s consumption of video games.
In China, strict regulations limit children under 18 to just one hour of online gaming on certain days. This approach highlights the significant challenges of scaling and enforcing these rules, from ensuring compliance to protecting privacy.
“Spiritual opium”
China is home to a large video game industry. Its tech giants, like Tencent, are increasingly shaping the global gaming landscape. However, the issue of video game consumption by young people is a much thornier issue in China.
The country has a deep cultural and social history that associates video games with addiction and harm, often calling them “spiritual opium.” This narrative presents gambling as a potential threat to the physical, mental and social well-being of young people.
For many Chinese parents, this perception shapes how they view their children’s play. They often view video games as a disruptive force that harms academic achievement and social development.
Such parental anxiety has paved the way for China to implement strict regulations on children’s online games. This approach has received broad support from parents.
In 2019, China introduced a law limiting gaming for under-18s to 90 minutes a day on weekdays and three hours on weekends. A “curfew” would prohibit gaming from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m.
A 2021 amendment further restricted recess to only 8:00 p.m.-9:00 p.m. on Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and holidays.
In 2023, China expanded this regulatory framework beyond online gaming to include live streaming platforms, video sharing sites and social networks. This requires platforms to build and complete “addiction prevention systems”.
How is it applied?
Major gaming companies in China implement various compliance mechanisms to ensure compliance with these regulations. Some games incorporate age verification systems, asking players to provide their real name and ID to confirm their age.
Some have even introduced facial recognition to ensure compliance among minors. This approach has raised privacy concerns.
At the same time, mobile device manufacturers, app stores and app developers have introduced “minor modes”. This is a feature on mobile games and apps that limits user access once a designated time limit is reached (with an exception for apps pre-approved by parents).
A November 2022 report from the China Game Industry Research Institute – a state-affiliated organization – declared success. More than 75% of minors reportedly spent less than three hours a week gaming, and authorities claimed to have reduced their “Internet addiction.”
Yet these policies still face significant implementation challenges and highlight a broader set of ethical questions.
Does it work?
Despite China’s strict rules, many young players manage to get around them. A recent study found that more than 77 percent of minors surveyed evaded real name verification by registering accounts under the names of older relatives or friends.
Additionally, a growing black market for gaming accounts has emerged on Chinese trading platforms. These allow minors to rent or purchase accounts to bypass restrictions.
Reports that minors have managed to defeat facial recognition mechanisms – for example by using photos of elderly people – highlight the limits of technology-based law enforcement.
The regulation also introduced unintended risks for minors, including falling victim to scams involving gambling account sellers. In one reported case, nearly 3,000 minors were collectively defrauded of more than 86,000 yuan (around A$18,500) as they attempted to circumvent the restrictions.
What can Australia learn from China?
The Chinese context shows that failing to meaningfully address young people’s motivations to consume media can end up pushing them to circumvent restrictions.
A similar dynamic could easily emerge in Australia. This would weaken the impact of the government’s ban on social media.
Before the law was introduced, we and many colleagues argued that outright bans imposed by technological measures of questionable effectiveness risked being both invasive and ineffective. They can also increase online risks for young people.
Instead, Australian researchers and policymakers should work with platforms to create safer online environments. This can be achieved using tools such as age-appropriate content filters, parental controls and screen time management features, as well as broader safety by design approaches.
These measures empower families while allowing young people to maintain digital social connections and play. These activities are increasingly recognized as essential to the development of children.
Importantly, a more nuanced approach promotes healthier online habits without compromising young people’s privacy or freedom.
Ben Egliston is supported by funding from the Australian Research Council (DE240101275). It has already received funding from Meta and TikTok.
Marcus Carter is the recipient of an Australian Research Council Studentship (No. 220100076) in ‘The Monetization of Children in the Digital Games Industry’. He has previously received funding from Meta, TikTok and Snapchat, and has consulted for Telstra. He is currently a board member and past president of the Digital Games Research Association of Australia.
Tianyi Zhangshao does not work for, consult, own shares in, or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
