Image

Social Media Age Verification May Soon Be Mandatory for All Australians

"If there’s going to be age verification, everybody is going to have to go through that age verification process..."

In a move that’s sparking serious privacy concerns, Australians of all ages may soon be required to verify their age before accessing their social media accounts.

Greens Senator David Shoebridge echoed the concerns that Caldron Pool has been warning about, raising questions about the policy’s implications.

He asked, “If you’re testing to see if someone’s 13, or 14, or 15, or 16, you’re also testing to see, by definition, if they’re 16-plus. So, if there’s going to be age verification, everybody is going to have to go through an age verification process, won’t they?”

Labor Senator Jenny McAllister confirmed, replying, “Yes.”

Shoebridge then added, “So, this isn’t just about privacy or collecting data about kids, this is literally everybody accessing social media. That’s how it has to work, isn’t it?”

“Yes.”

Of course, this move suggests that Labor is willing to enforce age verification requirements on every social media user, not just minors. Naturally, concerned Australians have argued that this could pave the way for unprecedented privacy intrusions for anyone trying to access their online accounts.

For the sake of clarity, we’ll reiterate the position we’ve been voicing in response to this proposed legislation:

First of all, no—children should not be on social media. But policing this sort of thing is the responsibility of parents, not our politicians.

But to be honest, we shouldn’t be under any delusion that this legislation has anything to do with “protecting kids,” especially considering everything our youngsters copped from our politicians over the past few years. For months on end, they were isolated, banned from school, prevented from playing sports, and not allowed to socialise with their friends. Of course, this had a serious impact on their mental health, development, and well-being.

What’s more likely is that the well-being of our kids is being used as a pretext so that all opposition can be dismissed as irrational, heartless, and uncaring. As we’ve previously noted, in 2022, the government and the media floated the idea of requiring all social media accounts to be linked to personal identification in an effort to end online anonymity. The suggestion was widely criticized for obvious privacy concerns. This new legislation could effectively be used to achieve that very same end.

What’s more, as with all legislation, precedent must be seriously considered. If we allow the government to intrude into the home life under the guise of protecting the health and safety of our kids, then why should it stop with social media access? What about access to other “harmful” things?

How long will it be until they dictate what foods our kids can consume, how much exercise they’re required to do daily, and what programs they must and must not watch on television?

Now, someone might say, “But some parents are bad parents!” This is true. Some parents don’t regulate their children’s online activities. Some parents feed their children more junk food than others. Some parents allow their children to spend too much time on the screens. Some parents don’t enrol their children in any sports or encourage any form of physical activity.

But that is no reason to imagine the only possible solution is that the government dictates the diets of all children, or that our politicians come up with legislation banning all kids from screens, or that they introduce state-mandated sporting programs for our kids.

The Australian government is evidently struggling to handle its own responsibilities, like tackling the cost of living, immigration, or the housing crisis. So instead, they run a joint campaign implying that parents are failing at their parental responsibilities and that the government must intervene to remedy our incompetence with yet more laws.

But it really is possible to exist without the government’s continual oversight and intervention. Unfortunately, far too many Australians suffer a “convict mindset.” They wear invisible chains. They simply cannot conceive of solutions to our family or social challenges that don’t involve abdicating personal responsibility to a government eager to seize more control over our lives.

Special Request:

For nearly eight years, we've highlighted issues ignored by mainstream media and resisted globalist ideologies eroding Western civilization. We've done this joyfully, without paywalls, despite personal costs to our team. Your support has kept us going, but operating costs exceed donations, forcing us to use ads. We’d love to ditch them, so we’re asking for your help. If you value our work, please consider supporting us via Stripe or PayPal. Every bit helps us keep fighting for our kids’ future. Thank you!

What's New?

Use the blue arrows at the bottom to scroll through the latest.
Final 130 Christian Children Freed After Month in Islamist Captivity in Nigeria

Final 130 Christian Children Freed After Month in Islamist Captivity in Nigeria

"Armed 'bandits' took 315 students and 12 staff members from Papiri’s St Mary's Catholic School captive in late November."
By
by Rod LampardJan 17, 2026
A Government That Won’t Acknowledge Christianity Can’t Defend the Nation

A Government That Won’t Acknowledge Christianity Can’t Defend the Nation

"By refusing to name its own moral foundations, the state undermines its ability to openly distinguish between belief systems that can coexist within its legal and moral order and those that fundamentally conflict with them. A society that cannot articulate its core moral commitments cannot coherently defend them."
By
by Staff WriterJan 16, 2026
Hate Speech Laws Are Just Blasphemy Laws

Hate Speech Laws Are Just Blasphemy Laws

"Blasphemy laws protect a society’s sacred object from verbal violation. Hate speech laws do the same, only the sacred object has changed. They are secularism’s answer to blasphemy law: enforcing reverence for the system’s ultimate values while denying that those values are religious at all."
By
by Staff WriterJan 15, 2026
Opposition Grows to Labor’s “Horrendous” Hate Speech Bill: “Worst Assault on Freedom Yet”

Opposition Grows to Labor’s “Horrendous” Hate Speech Bill: “Worst Assault on Freedom Yet”

Opposition to the federal government’s Combating Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill 2026 is mounting across multiple parties, with MPs and senators warning that the rushed, broadly worded legislation threatens free speech, religious freedom and civil liberties while failing to address the causes of extremism.
By
by Staff WriterJan 15, 2026
Democrats Want Trump’s War Powers Limited Over a War With Venezuela That Doesn’t Exist

Democrats Want Trump’s War Powers Limited Over a War With Venezuela That Doesn’t Exist

“This Vote greatly hampers American self-defence and National Security, impeding the President’s Authority as Commander in Chief,” Trump wrote.
By
by Rod LampardJan 14, 2026
True Leaders Inspire Unity, Weak Men Legislate It

True Leaders Inspire Unity, Weak Men Legislate It

"Heavy-handed laws, by contrast, are a symptom of weakness—a last resort when authority has decayed, and coercion is all that remains."
By
by Staff WriterJan 13, 2026
Australians Sound Alarm Over New Draconian “Hate” Bill

Australians Sound Alarm Over New Draconian “Hate” Bill

"The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has allowed less than 48 hours for public submissions on the 144-page draft bill."
By
by Staff WriterJan 13, 2026
Hate Speech Laws Are an Admission of Government Failure

Hate Speech Laws Are an Admission of Government Failure

"Hate speech laws are evidence that our governments can no longer inspire loyalty, trust, or solidarity. They are an admission that policymakers have no unifying vision capable of bringing diverse people together voluntarily. So instead, they use force."
By
by Ben DavisJan 13, 2026

Image

Support

If you value our work and would like to support us, you can do so by visiting our support page. Can’t find what you’re looking for? Visit our search page.

Copyright © 2025, Caldron Pool

Permissions

Everything published at Caldron Pool is protected by copyright and cannot be used and/or duplicated without prior written permission. Links and excerpts with full attribution are permitted. Published articles represent the opinions of the author and may not reflect the views of all contributors at Caldron Pool.

Caldron Pool does not condone the use of violence, threats, or intimidation for political or religious purposes. We strongly advocate for peaceful, respectful, and free communication and open debate without fear of reprisal or punishment.