Australia Social Media Ban Study finds age checks failing to stop under-16 users

Australia’s Australia Social Media Ban is struggling to keep under-16 users off major social media platforms, according to a new study. Researchers found that platforms rarely asked users to verify their age after the law took effect.

Intel Investment Intel to invest €5 billion in Ireland to expand AI chip production

Since December, Australia’s law has required platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat and YouTube to prevent users under 16 from creating accounts. To comply, the government has advised companies to use multiple methods to confirm a user’s age.

However, critics say the law has failed to achieve its goal. Several studies suggest many teenagers still access social media without difficulty. As a result, Australia doubled the maximum fines for non-compliance last month and warned technology companies of possible legal action.

A software testing team that helped advise the government’s rollout examined the system. During the study, researchers created 50 accounts after the law came into force and listed each user as 16 years old. Notably, none of the platforms requested proof of age.

According to Andrew Hammond, director of testing firm KJR, every test account remained active. The accounts were spread across nine of the 10 platforms covered by the law, including Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube.

Meanwhile, some test accounts received advertisements aimed at teenagers. Hammond said this suggested the platforms recognised the users’ likely age group. He also said one account on X that claimed to belong to a 16-year-old received pornographic content.

Although none of the platforms accepted users who declared they were under 16, only Australian live-streaming platform Kick required age verification before allowing someone who claimed to be 16 to register.

In response, Meta said the findings did not reflect the regulator’s guidance. The company said platforms should request stronger verification only when user behaviour suggests someone may be underage or when another user reports the account.

Meanwhile, Snap declined to comment. Google and X did not respond to requests for comment. Kick said it could not rely on age inference because it lacked enough user data.

The eSafety Commissioner said the regulator remains confident that platforms have the tools and resources needed to prevent children under 16 from opening accounts. Furthermore, the regulator said using multiple layers of age checks helps avoid a single point of failure.

However, some advisers involved in the original 2025 trial argued that the testing overlooked a major weakness. They said researchers did not fully examine how easily teenagers could bypass the system by entering false birthdates.

Colm Gannon, chief executive of the International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children Australia, said advisers repeatedly raised concerns about circumvention during the trial. He added that avoiding age restrictions by providing false information has now become common among young users.

Looking ahead, youth digital rights researcher Amanda Third said platforms were always expected to begin with self-declared age checks before introducing more advanced age-detection systems. She said future data may provide a clearer picture of the law’s effectiveness.