A study of 408 teens in Australia finds 80%+ were still using social media three months after the ban came into force, citing inadequate age verification checks
Experts say law not enough to stop children accessing harmful content online and more ‘convincing strategy is required’
The GuardianAnna Bawden
Context & Ripple Effects
Australia’s under-16 social-media policy was built around placing responsibility on platforms, with potential penalties for systemic failures. Earlier coverage had already indicated that platforms retained large underage user bases and that many teens expected to keep access after the restriction.
The newer teen survey and test-account findings point to the same implementation gap: the technical ability to assess age does not, by itself, ensure that platforms consistently apply checks or remove ineligible accounts.
First-order effects
Under-16 users continue to reach social platforms despite the restriction, limiting the policy’s immediate effect on exposure to the content it was meant to address.
Platforms face sharper scrutiny over whether their age-assurance and account-enforcement systems meet the standard implied by the law and its penalty framework.
Second-order effects
Regulators are likely to shift attention from the existence of age-checking tools to evidence of actual enforcement, including how easily new accounts can be created and retained.
Platforms may face pressure to tighten onboarding and account review flows, increasing friction for young users and potentially for legitimate users whose age cannot be readily established.
Third-order effects
If repeated audits show broad circumvention, child-safety policy may move beyond access bans toward a combined model of age assurance, product-safety obligations, and measurable enforcement outcomes.
Australia’s experience could become a test case for whether platform-based age restrictions are enforceable at scale without more robust verification standards and clearer accountability.
The trend: The story is part of a broader shift from announcing youth-access restrictions to testing whether platforms can operationalize and prove effective age assurance.
A lot of the response to the failure to enforce Australia's teen social media ban has focused on the companies, naturally. — One question I have is: should the government pursued a policy on a crucial issue that they were warned could be a struggle to enforce?
My only surprise is that these numbers aren't higher: — “About 15% of the 12- to 13-year-olds and 19% of the 14- to 15-year-olds surveyed said they used a fake account”
Absolutely no one predicted this. — Not that actual evidence have any effect on Labour's performative proposals in this area. — www.theguardian.com/media/2026/ j...
You don't say? ... “Four in five under-16s in Australia using social media despite ban, study shows ... A major factor in teenagers' continued use of banned social platforms was inadequate age verification checks. ” www.theguardian.com/media/2026/ j... [embedded post]
More than 80% of under-16s in Australia said they were still using social media three months after legislation banning them from it came into force, research shows<bans are not the answer for many reasons. — www.theguardian.com/media/2026/ j... The research www.bmj.com/content…
entirely predictable! and clear evidence that a bolder approach to the toxic business models of social media platforms is needed from the UK government and others