‘Mastermind’ Behind Australia’s Teen Social Media Ban Campaign Linked to Gambling Advertising Agency

Investigations by media outlets like Tribuna and Crikey have found that the 36 Months campaign was developed by FINCH, a well-known Australian advertising agency. However, instead of being organised by a prent group or charity, the campaign’s messaging, visuals, and media rollout were handled by advertising professionals.

FINCH later confirmed its involvement and said the campaign was driven by staff members who are parents and concerned about the effects of social media on teenagers. The agency also said that it wanted to raise awareness and push for action on the issue, which it believes has been ignored for too long.

The problem here, according to many critics, is that the campaign’s origins were not clearly explained when it first came to public attention. They say this matters because 36 Months was the key voice in the national debate that helped shape government policy and led to the ban, and it received widespread media coverage. It was quoted as representing concerned parents, which gave it strong credibility with the public. As it turns out, it was created by an advertising company.

The pushback around the 36 Months campaign has intensified because FINCH is also known for its work in gambling advertising. The agency has produced campaigns for some of the largest betting and wagering brands in the country, and the gambling industry has long been criticised in Australia for the reach and volume of its marketing.

There is no evidence that gambling companies directly funded the 36 Months campaign or were involved in its messaging. Still, critics say the connection matters, given the ongoing debate around gambling ads and their exposure to younger audiences.

For some, the overlap raises questions about transparency in public campaigns that influence national policy. They argue that when professional advertising firms with strong commercial ties shape public opinion, those links should be made clear from the start.

The federal government has strongly backed the under-16 social media ban, framing it as a necessary step to reduce online harm and protect children. The legislation came into effect on December 10, 2025, and made Australia one of the first countries to introduce such broad restrictions.

Under the policy, responsibility sits with major social media platforms to prevent underage access, rather than with parents or schools. Companies that fail to enforce age limits will face severe penalties under the new rules.

The government also supported the ban with a national awareness campaign, which helped push the issue into the public spotlight as debate around social media use and teenage wellbeing intensified across the country.

The debate around the 36 Months campaign has shifted the focus from the social media ban itself to how public support for major policies is built in Australia. Critics argue the issue is not whether protecting children online is important, but whether campaigns that influence national laws should be clearer about who is behind them.

When a campaign is widely presented as a ‘concerned parents’ movement, Australians should be able to easily understand its origins, especially when professional advertising firms with commercial ties are involved.