Australia's nationwide ban on social media accounts for users under 16 has encountered fresh scrutiny, with new research suggesting age verification measures are failing to stop many teenagers from accessing major platforms.
The law, introduced in December, requires services such as Instagram, Snapchat and YouTube to prevent children under 16 from opening accounts. Companies are required to take "reasonable steps" to enforce the rules, with regulators recommending a combination of age-checking methods rather than relying on a single verification process.
Despite those requirements, critics say enforcement has been weak. A software testing firm that previously evaluated age-assurance technology created 50 new accounts after the law took effect, each registering the user as 16 years old. According to the researchers, none of the platforms requested proof of age before allowing the accounts to go live.
The findings point to a significant gap in the system. While much attention has focused on AI-powered age estimation using photos or identity checks, researchers say the initial screening process—which attempts to estimate a user's age from online behavior—has largely failed to identify potentially underage users for additional verification.
Andrew Hammond, director of testing company KJR, said every test account remained active across nine of the 10 platforms covered by the legislation, including Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube. Some accounts were even shown products aimed at teenagers, while one account on X that listed its age as 16 reportedly received adult content recommendations.
The study found that all platforms blocked users who openly declared they were under 16. However, Australia's streaming platform Kick was the only service that required age verification before allowing someone claiming to be 16 to register.
Several technology companies declined to comment on the findings, while Meta said the trial did not appear to reflect how its enforcement system works. The company argued that accounts identifying themselves as being over the minimum age may only face stronger verification if their activity suggests they are underage or if they are reported by other users.
Kick said relying on behavior-based age estimation is difficult because the platform does not yet have enough user data to accurately infer ages.
Australia's eSafety Commissioner defended the current framework, saying platforms have the technology needed to comply with the law and that using multiple layers of age verification helps reduce the risk of users bypassing the system.
The latest findings add to growing criticism of the rollout. Earlier government claims that millions of suspected underage accounts had been removed have been followed by reports of widespread non-compliance. Authorities have since warned several technology companies of possible legal action and recently doubled the maximum financial penalties for failing to enforce the rules.
Experts involved in earlier testing say they repeatedly warned that the original trials did not adequately examine how easily young users could bypass the system by entering false birthdates. They argue that this has become one of the biggest weaknesses in the current approach.
Others believe the system could improve over time. Digital rights researcher Amanda Third said platforms were expected to initially focus on users who openly identified themselves as underage before gradually expanding to more advanced age-detection methods. She said future data may provide a clearer picture of whether enforcement becomes more effective.
#worldnews