Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Australia Government Social Networks

Australia's Teen Social Media Ban Isn't Working. Half Their Teens Still Have Access, Survey Finds (yahoo.com) 76

Posted by EditorDavid from the anti-social-behavior dept.
After Australia banned social media for users younger than 16, teenagers "immediately worked to circumvent the restrictions," reports Fortune: 14-year-old in New South Wales, told The Washington Post in December 2025, just before the implementation of the ban, she planned to use her mother's face ID to log in to Snapchat and . In a Reddit thread on ways to bypass the ban, one user suggested using a printed mesh face mask from Temu to outsmart apps' facial recognition tools. Others still have tried VPNs that obscure their locations.

A new report suggests these efforts are working. In a survey of 1,050 Australians ages 12 to 15 conducted last month, the UK-based suicide prevention organization the Molly Rose Foundation found more than 60% of teens who had social media accounts before the ban still had access to at least one of those platforms. Social media sites including TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, have retained more than half of their users under 16. About two-thirds of young users say these platforms have taken "no action" to remove or reactive accounts that existed before the restrictions.

The survey comes at the heels of the Australian internet regulator calling for an investigation into the five largest social media platforms over potential breaches of the ban.
The article points out that "Greece, France, Indonesia, Austria, Spain, and the UK have or are considering similar action, and eight U.S. states are weighing legislation that would put guardrails or ban social media use for minors.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australia's Teen Social Media Ban Isn't Working. Half Their Teens Still Have Access, Survey Finds More

Australia's Teen Social Media Ban Isn't Working. Half Their Teens Still Have Access, Survey Finds

Comments Filter:

  • Duh (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Your "kids" know more about tech then your politicians. Film at 11.

  • The kids are alright (Score:2, Insightful)

    by OzJimbob ( 129746 )

    Imagine if we punished social media companies for the harm they are responsible for, rather than punishing kids for wanting to communicate with their friends and the world.

    • Sure, don't punish young Tina for wanting to hook up with "Joe" on Facebook (because she's heard it's fun or whatever from her friends or seen girls on Tiktok hooking up with older guys). Is there a reason Tina can't bike over to her friend's house?

      The 'Company' has enough money to settle anything... but young Tina's 12-year-old self won't be the same after "Joe" is done.
      Maybe, the parents could do something, completely unknown these days, I think it's called PARENTING.
      I doubt the kids need a $1,000 smartp

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by martin-boundary ( 547041 )
        Ah, you're the PARENTS guy. I've seen your posts around. It's always somebody else's fault, not the US companies who move fast and break things. It's an extreme position to have, but in America at least you're entitled to it.

        If you ever travel abroad, you might be shocked to find that people in other countries will vehemently disagree with you, and they don't necessarily care for the "its just free speech" defense.

      • they'd be fine with a limited flip phone

        Flip phones as you remember them don't exist anymore, and if you do buy a vintage relic it won't connect to modern cell networks (at least, not here in the USA).

        You're actually better off getting a kid a modern smartphone with the parental controls enabled rather than hoping outdated tech is going to keep them away from inappropriate things. For example, an old school RAZR (ignoring those network incompatibilities I'd previously mentioned) has absolutely no capabilities to detect and filter nudity from tex

      • If you are in Canada and you are a girl who is not into ringette or a boy who is not into hockey, you will have troubles without the Internet.
      • Interesting little fantasy you have here It goes real well with the "please save the children" assholes who don't care a bit about children but do care about whatever it is they want to get using that tactic this time.

        Oh, and statistics are your friends (or at least mine): North of 9 abused kids out of 10 were so from family members or otherwise very familiar persons, not strangers they met online, on the streets or wherever.

        https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]

  • Who could have ever predicted this outcome?

    • Re:Oh no (Score:5, Insightful)

      by arglebargle_xiv ( 2212710 ) on Sunday April 26, 2026 @12:41AM (#66112582)

      It is actually working, it's cut social media use by kids by half, that's a pretty impressive result.

      Compare TFA's headline to the following:

      Australia's Speed Limits Aren't Working. Half Their Drivers Still Speed, Survey Finds

      • Also, it started from a situation where young kids and their friends had 100% access and were hooked, and therefore motivated to keep. In the coming years, kids and their friends who never had access, were never hooked, don't know clearly what's the benefit, will have the possibility to use social networks, but won't be motivated. There are good chances the usage will be low.

        • Exactly. Social media is an ecosystem, this is degrading the ecosystem for young users. It could plateau, in which case more intervention is warranted. But more than likely, just like in a real ecosystem, it begins to degrade things fundamentally. Fewer kids get access young, so the social pressure to be online subsides. Parents now have firm backing not to allow social media use, and feel increasingly empowered to push back on child access. With fewer users in their peer group engaging and creating conten

      • Helping half the teen population in such a short time is excellent progress

      • Exactly, the fact that a lot of media likes to spin everything into a negative is exhausting, let's post the good things again that give hope an optimism.

  • social media companies. They'll either pull out of the country/state or comply. Make it so there's severe tort exposure if they do nothing by private right of action.

    Age verification is being implemented in the wrong place. Like others have said, the endgame my be no internet access unless we know who you are.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by cusco ( 717999 )

      They'll either buy the politicians or bribe the judges to ensure that any tort exposure is minimized if they do nothing.

      FTFY

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        This is in Australia not America you moron.

  • What alternatives are they promoting? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by balaam's ass ( 678743 ) on Saturday April 25, 2026 @07:27PM (#66112196) Journal

    Okay, ban social media, but have they also instituted any programs to help kids socialize IRL? Because the world has largely forgotten how to do that. After school programs, sports clubs -- are they pushing anything to to replace or *displace* social media to fill the void left by the social media ban?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by hwstar ( 35834 )

      IMHO Social media this one of the reasons the world as gone to pot.

      Bring back physical social gatherings where you get to see the faces of the persons you are socializing with. This way they can't hide behind their device. This tends to keep people honest.

      • I remember I used to bike or walk over to my friend's houses (and knew how to use the phone on the wall between kitchen and livingroom to call)... we didn't do any talking online (once being online became cheaper)... cellphones were a ways off (and, those were holding a low-profile graphics card).
        We'd go out biking and occasionally camp out in the backyard behind my house.

        Now, kids are glued to the phones/tablets and games consoles all the time, and that's where they learn their social skills.
        The daughter g

      • Does that include slashdot?

      • The problem is that kids have gotten a lot more cliquish since we were kids. My kids didn't play ringette or hockey but that seemed to be the only thing that made groups of friends. Because there was no "after school time" there was ringette and hockey after school. So the kids left school and immediately went there and that's where their friends were made. The parents would make this worse by driving to be part of that social circle themselves.

      • I was a "weird kid" in school, and was bullied for it. The kind of kid we now call "aneurotypical" and other kids actually stand up to people picking on them was, when I was in school, only a target for abuse. I didn't want to socialize with those psychopathic little fucks. I learned to be social... through the internet. Today part of my job is conducting interviews, and part of that is rapidly building rapport with people I've never spoken with before and whose lives may be very different from my own. And

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      Band camp.

    • After school programs, sports clubs -- are they pushing anything to to replace or *displace* social media to fill the void left by the social media ban?

      Schools usually do have programs for the more mainstream sorts of interests. Kids tend to go online when their interests fall outside of those areas.

    • My kids have managed fine without social media, so the ban hasn't affected them at all. There are various services for children to socialise provided by government-affiliated groups if parents aren't involved.

      Sydney has PCYC (run by the police) which operates youth centres with sport facilities and various affordable programs. Melbourne has "adventure playgrounds", weekly video game groups run by the social housing providers, free after-school soccer programs run in association with the Melbourne Victory

    • Okay, ban social media, but have they also instituted any programs to help kids socialize IRL?

      Did we need programs for that? I mean kids were able to do that before social media just fine, and all those options are still available to them. All these still exist. No one shut down the football club because Snapchat existed.

      Because the world has largely forgotten how to do that.

      Kids don't forget things, they learn things. The results of mobile phone bans in other countries just showed that kids put down their phone and started playing and interacting like normal. There is no basis for you to say that kids either have no options, or don't know how to do tho

  • It's just only 50% effective.

    • It's already 50% effective. (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It's already 50% effective.
      Social media companies have had some time to implement the rules, so now it's time to start using the stick. Few whacks and they'll get the message.

  • If a virus only infects 50% of people, that doesn't mean "nobody is getting infected". The inability for people to see nuance is annoying. 50% certainly is not 0% and it is not 100%. The idea that "perfect is the enemy of good" still applies to modern life, even if you don't understand it.

    • Re:"isn't working" is absolutist thinking. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by high_rolla ( 1068540 ) on Saturday April 25, 2026 @11:31PM (#66112522) Homepage

      My guess is that the people putting this out know this perfectly well. What they are trying to do is put out propaganda to sway public sentiment that the system is not working and should therefore be scrapped. I suspect this content is being funded indirectly by the social media companies.

      My fear is that the people putting this out are going to be somewhat successful in their endevours.

  • So, even if you make it law... who enforces this ban? The ISP (at the house), the cell provider (who the kid uses for data to avoid the modem's parental controls), the parents (who barely spend time with the kid because they work so late)?
    If it's Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram... that are responsible, unless they face-scan every pic posted and verify it against the ID that was used to open the account, I can hand my phone to my sis (or brother, or whoever is older), and pass age verification tests.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      So you haven't the slightest idea what the law is about but spent paragraphs with hypothetical nonsense posted in ignorance.
      What was the point?

      • Yes, I do understand what the 'law' discussed is about.
        The actual idea has been batted around the cages for a while, but nobody has to date, and if it's on Facebook's or TikTok's end, they don't have a way to enforce it.

        There's no way to truly enforce it... a kid needs to be 16 to get on one of the sites that need 'age verification'... go to my brother or sister or a friend at school, and they help me get past that verification... not a big deal.
        Does this system verify you every single time you open the app

  • Its the same issue as inmates having phones and social media accounts. If you have access to money and credentials anything is easy to obtain.
  • I'm a glass half full kind of guy: Australia is off to a great start!

    It could also help break the chain of "everyone is on social media, so I have to be there too" FOMO that drives a lot of addiction.

    I kept my now-young-adult kids completely off social media until they were 18. They have thanked me many times for it after seeing what it did to their peers.
    • Then what's the next step for Australia? Send masked goons in uniforms to kids houses? I hope they will have their hand over their gun while they ring the doorbell...
      • Would you prefer they send those goons over with bottles of rum and a few cartons of cigarettes instead because FREEDUM?

        Maybe you don't work in the social media field like I do, which means you don't realize the purposely addictive nature of the products they have developed--or the apparently permanent(!) neurological changes that have been observed in younger users/addicts.
  • Pushing out American social media companies because they've seen how powerful they are for propaganda and you can't really have a potentially hostile foreign Nation with a enormous propaganda apparatus operating inside your country.

    So you start with children and you work your way up until you've pushed them out of the market.
  • Some lawmakers, swaggering all over the place, drunk on their sycophant's praise and self importance, will always pass laws that are not really feasible nor useful but panders to their own fantasies. Their ilks, whether a banana republic dictator, or an Australian mp, can be relied on to make many piece of legislature that are newsworthy contributions in their arrogance and uselessness, and not on their feasibility. After all they don't have to be the schmuck who has to implement them.

  • That didn't stop anyone either.

    Tit pix over 56k dialup was something special when you were 13 years old. Or slighly cute but also pathetic in retrospect. Oy I'm getting old...

    • In the dialup age it was just assumed if you figured that shit out, you were probably mature enough to handle porn. Thing is though, this really isn't about porn, it's about the nebulous sort of mental health issues that are believed to result from letting kids doomscroll. They used to say the same thing about TV, too.

      I tend to think the truth is somewhere in the middle - it's obvious that social media is messing up some of the younger generation, but we've always had a percentage of kids who end up using

      • One could say the same thing about adults. There's always a 10% that's crazier/stupider/generally more dysfunctional than the other 90%.

        I look back on the people I went to high school with. Look them up on occasion (as one does with complete strangers one casually crossed paths with decades ago) and even the delinquents are mostly solid citizens at this point: doctors, engineers, business owners, realtors, seemingly happy parents. There's a couple of notable exceptions of people who've gone dark that it's c

  • The law made social media the prize for winning the game
    Kids love games and are good at finding workarounds for silly rules

  • Just like the cellphone bans in schools.

    Tenn bring an iPhone 8 from their parents' old phones drawer to be locked in, while keeping their own in their underwear somewhere.

  • https://www.esafety.gov.au/sit... [esafety.gov.au]

    Nothing in that guidance is reasonable, least of all the amount of time they say reasonable. Keep in mind, there can be penalties for unjustly refusing a "substantial" amount of users too. All these companies almost certainly communicated exactly what they were going to do to eSafety. Yeah they have some perverse incentives to let kids stay too though, but mostly government created a Gordian knot for them and reserves the right to arbitrarily punish them for not being able t

  • I'm not sure I would call a 40% reduction in social media access "not working" â" no law is ever 100% effective, and there are reasons to think that even a modest reduction would be very helpful.

    The most pernicious thing about social media for teens is that they feel like they have to participate even when they know it's not good for them (e.g., https://www.nber.org/papers/w3... [nber.org]). So cutting social media access in half sounds like a good start to making it feel at least optional so teens can opt out (o

  • So let me get this straight, reducing the number of teens using social media by 50% is evidence that it is "not working"? Was this written by someone at meta?
  • It was a survey, so it's probably around 80% in reality. And the 20% who obeyed should probably not have hadsocial media in the first place. I'm still of the opinion that while it's not wring to ban social media for kids, I really see no reason not to ban it for everyone else that can't handle it better than a 12 year old. Or just ban those adficfibe dark patterns for everyone.

  • No one could possibly have seen that coming.

    Good news though, the government has more personal data for future privacy invasion. So it's not a total loss.

  • The first weekend I noticed some parents riding their kids up and down the river tracks here. A month on that reduced to a few. Now its back to almost none. When the parents realised how much attention they should be paying their kids, they obviously said so long as we do not explicitly know, do whatever you want and stop us having to exercise with you.

Slashdot Top Deals

"No problem is so formidable that you can't walk away from it." -- C. Schulz

Close