Australia’s world-first ban on social media access for children under 16 is facing renewed scrutiny after a new study found that major online platforms are failing to properly verify users’ ages, allowing many underage users to bypass the restrictions.
The legislation, which came into force in December, requires social media companies, including Instagram, Snapchat and YouTube, to prevent anyone under the age of 16 from opening or maintaining an account. Platforms are expected to take “reasonable steps” to enforce the restrictions, with the government recommending the use of multiple age-verification methods.
However, researchers say the rollout has fallen short of expectations, with evidence suggesting that many underage users continue to access the platforms without being asked to verify their age.
A follow-up assessment by software testing company KJR found that none of the 50 test accounts it created after the law took effect were required to complete any form of age verification. Each account was registered with a declared age of 16.
Andrew Hammond, Director of KJR, said the findings expose a significant flaw in the system, with platforms relying largely on self-declared ages instead of requiring users to provide additional proof of age.
The test accounts remained active across nine of the ten platforms covered by the legislation, including Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube. Researchers also found that some accounts received advertisements targeted at teenagers, while another account created on X and registered as a 16-year-old was reportedly exposed to pornographic content.
The study found that while platforms blocked users who declared themselves to be under 16, only the Australian live-streaming platform Kick required proof of age before allowing an account to be created.
Several technology companies responded differently to the findings. Meta said its systems are designed to introduce stricter verification measures when user behaviour suggests an account may belong to someone underage or when an account is reported. The company also questioned whether the test accounts behaved in ways similar to those of actual teenage users.
Kick defended its approach, saying it could not yet rely on behavioural age detection because the platform lacks sufficient user data to accurately estimate users’ ages.
Meanwhile, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner maintained confidence that regulated platforms have the technology needed to prevent children under 16 from creating accounts, provided the recommended layered verification process is properly implemented.
The latest findings add to growing criticism of the social media ban. Although authorities initially reported that millions of suspected underage accounts had been removed shortly after the law took effect, concerns over compliance have persisted.
Earlier this year, the Australian government warned several major technology companies of possible legal action over alleged failures to comply with the legislation. Last month, it also announced plans to double the maximum financial penalties for platforms found to be in breach of the law.
Experts involved in developing the age-assurance framework have also expressed concerns that the system did not adequately account for common methods of bypassing the restrictions, such as teenagers entering false dates of birth during registration.
Despite the criticism, researchers believe the system could become more effective as platforms gradually introduce more advanced age-detection measures. They say future assessments will provide a clearer picture of whether the safeguards can successfully prevent underage users from accessing social media.