Australia’s new online safety law, which enforces a sweeping ban on social media use for children under 16, has sparked intense debate across the country. Among those most affected are young influencers who have built careers—and entire livelihoods—through platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram.
One of the most high-profile examples is The Empire Family, a Perth-based influencer family that has decided to relocate to London in order to protect the digital career of their 14-year-old daughter, Charli. With the law set to take effect in December, the family says leaving Australia is the only way to continue their online journey and maintain the millions of followers they have cultivated over the past seven years.
The decision underscores the cultural and generational tensions that have emerged as governments grapple with the mental health and safety risks of social media while balancing the growing reality of online entrepreneurship among youth.
A Family Built on the Digital Age
For millions of young Australians, The Empire Family has become a familiar name. Led by Beck and Rebecca, along with their two children, 17-year-old Prezley and 14-year-old Charli, the family began sharing their lives on social media in 2018. What started as lighthearted content soon evolved into a full-fledged brand—one that would attract more than six million followers across platforms. Their videos, ranging from family challenges to lifestyle updates, have earned them sponsorships, merchandise sales, and an international fan base.
However, their success now faces an unprecedented legal obstacle. The Albanese government’s under-16 social media ban, passed last year, is among the strictest such measures in the world. It prohibits anyone under 16 from maintaining social media accounts, effectively banning minors from engaging with or creating content on major platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, and X. Noncompliance could result in heavy fines for the platforms—up to A$50 million—if they fail to prevent underage users from accessing or operating accounts.
For Charli, who has spent nearly half her life building a digital persona and developing creative skills through content creation, the law poses an existential threat to her career. Her parents have made it clear that they support her passion and are unwilling to see it halted by legislative change. In a YouTube video announcing their decision to move, the family shared heartfelt reflections on their years in Australia and expressed sadness about leaving behind their home and community. Yet they emphasized that the move was necessary to ensure their daughter’s ability to continue her creative work freely.
Read : 17-Year-Old Cricketer Ben Austin Dies After Being Struck by Ball During Training in Melbourne
“Australia has been our home for so long,” the family said. “It’s where The Empire Family began, where our kids grew up and where so many of our memories were made. But sometimes, life takes you on a new adventure you never expected.”
Rebecca explained that once the government confirmed the ban would indeed take effect in December, they immediately began looking for a practical solution. “When we heard that it was actually going to happen, we were like, ‘Okay, we need a solution because Charli loves being online,’” she said. London, they concluded, offered the best opportunity for their children to continue their education and careers while remaining connected to their audience.
The Ban and Its Broader Implications
Australia’s social media age restriction was introduced as part of a larger effort to combat the growing evidence linking social media use to poor mental health outcomes among young people. Prime minister Anthony Albanese has been an outspoken advocate of stronger online safety measures, framing the law as a way to protect children from digital exploitation and psychological harm.
“Platforms now have a social responsibility to ensure the safety of our kids is a priority for them,” he said following the passage of the legislation. “We are making sure that mums and dads can have that different conversation today and in future days.”
The policy, however, has proven highly divisive. While many parents and advocacy groups have applauded the government’s action, arguing that it will shield children from the darker side of the internet—such as cyberbullying, body image pressures, and exposure to harmful content—others view the measure as excessively restrictive. Critics argue that it undermines digital literacy, stifles creativity, and ignores the social realities of an increasingly connected world.
Unlike similar age-based regulations in the European Union, where minors can still use social media with parental consent, the Australian law offers no such exception. This means even families who closely monitor their children’s online activities will be barred from allowing them to engage in social media under any circumstance. The “absolute” nature of the ban has left little room for compromise and placed significant pressure on young creators like Charli who have already turned online work into a legitimate profession.
More than 140 academics from Australia and abroad signed an open letter last year condemning the proposal as “too blunt an instrument to address risks effectively.” They argued that while protecting children from harm is a valid goal, such a sweeping restriction could have unintended consequences, including hindering the development of digital skills that are now essential in modern economies.
The enforcement of the ban also poses practical challenges. Although social media companies are expected to comply by using age verification technologies, there is no foolproof method to determine a user’s real age online. Experts have warned that without effective tools, enforcement could rely heavily on invasive identification checks or risk leaving the law largely symbolic. Nevertheless, the government proceeded, giving platforms a year to prepare. With the December deadline now imminent, families like The Empire Family have been forced to make difficult decisions about their futures.
The Debate Over Parenting, Privacy, and Digital Freedom
Rebecca and Beck maintain that their children’s experience with social media has been positive and carefully managed. They argue that the family treats their online presence as both a creative outlet and a professional pursuit, with boundaries clearly established to protect privacy. “We always have a bit of a discussion about what we would like to share,” Rebecca explained. “We don’t share anything that is even remotely private. It’s stuff that you would share on Facebook or something like that.”
Their approach reflects a growing divide between policymakers and families who have integrated digital platforms into their livelihoods. While some parents view the online world as inherently dangerous for children, others see it as an opportunity for education, entrepreneurship, and self-expression. For young influencers like Charli, social media is not simply entertainment—it is a platform for creativity, collaboration, and financial independence. Moving overseas, then, is not merely an act of defiance but a strategic choice to safeguard a career path that did not exist a generation ago.
The family’s relocation also highlights a global trend: as governments impose tighter online regulations, digital nomadism is becoming increasingly common. Creators, especially those with international audiences, are finding ways to move across borders to continue their work in more permissive environments. For The Empire Family, London represents a new beginning—a chance to continue their journey without fear of violating local law.
Read : 80-Year-Old Suzanne Rees Dies After Being Left Behind By Cruise Ship on Lizard Island
Still, the ethical questions surrounding young influencers remain unresolved. Critics point out that while some children enjoy fame and financial rewards, others may suffer from pressure, burnout, or privacy invasion. The balance between creative opportunity and child protection is delicate, and governments worldwide are struggling to find fair regulatory approaches.
In Australia, many experts have urged the government to consider alternative solutions, such as mandatory parental consent, digital literacy education, or platform-level reforms that target harmful algorithms and advertising practices. They argue that banning access altogether risks driving online activity underground or pushing children to use unregulated or encrypted services where they are harder to protect.
The Albanese government has defended its stance, citing data linking social media exposure to rising rates of anxiety, depression, and body image issues among adolescents. Supporters of the ban believe that delaying access to social media until age 16 gives young people time to develop emotional maturity before engaging in online interactions. However, for families like The Empire Family, the decision to leave is not rooted in opposition to protecting children but in frustration over a one-size-fits-all policy that disregards context.
Their daughter’s social media career is run under parental supervision, with structured content schedules and safety protocols that many argue already meet or exceed the law’s intended goals. As the global debate continues, the family’s move may serve as a test case for how restrictive social media laws shape not only online culture but also migration and identity in the digital era.
The story also raises broader questions about what it means to grow up in a world where the internet is both a playground and a workplace, and where childhood and professionalism increasingly overlap. Whether the Australian government’s approach will ultimately reduce harm or simply displace it remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: for The Empire Family, the cost of compliance was too high to bear.
Their departure marks more than just a relocation—it symbolizes a collision between tradition and technology, between parental authority and state control, and between the right to protection and the right to create. As Australia prepares to enforce its historic social media ban this December, the family’s farewell serves as both a personal and political statement on the future of childhood in the digital age.