Australia’s world-first ban on social media for children under 16 has hit a hard wall of reality. Nine months after the law took effect on 10 December 2025, official data shows the overwhelming majority of children are still logging on. The country’s online watchdog found that more than 80% of kids were still using an age-restricted platform such as Instagram, TikTok or Snapchat three months after the ban began. Usage dropped only marginally, from 85.9% before the ban to 81.5% after it. A significant part of that persistence, however, reflects a platform-side failure rather than active defiance by children. Independent research indicates that many platforms did not proactively remove pre-existing accounts, meaning a large share of under-16s never encountered a new verification prompt at all.
For educators, school leaders and policymakers who backed the legislation as a protective measure, those numbers raise a difficult question. Specifically, what does enforcement actually look like in practice?
What the Data Shows
The eSafety Commissioner’s findings are backed by independent research. A study published in the British Medical Journal tracked 408 adolescents. It found that 85% of Australians aged 12 to 15 were still using social media three months after the ban took effect. The headline enforcement figures look impressive on paper. Platforms have deactivated or restricted more than 5 million under-16 accounts since the law came into force. However, the persistent usage rates show that account removal alone does little. Children can simply create new profiles or slip through verification gaps.
Those gaps are significant. More than half of children surveyed reported that platforms never asked them to verify their age. Furthermore, a further 18% were misclassified as 16 or older, and 37% simply self-reported an older age at sign-up. As a result, harmful content remains widespread. Research from eSafety shows 96% of children aged 10 to 15 had used at least one social media platform. Additionally, 7 in 10 reported encountering harmful content. That included misogynistic material, dangerous online challenges, violent fight videos, and content promoting disordered eating and self-harm.
How Children Are Getting Around the Ban
Where platforms have introduced new sign-up checks, some teenagers have proven resourceful in sidestepping them. Some simply enter a fake date of birth at sign-up. Others keep their existing accounts active rather than deactivating them. Many also use virtual private networks to mask their location and avoid geo-based restrictions. Some methods are more creative. In one Reddit thread on bypassing the ban, a user suggested wearing a printed mesh face mask purchased from Temu to fool facial recognition tools. Others reported borrowing their parents’ face IDs to pass age checks.
Teachers and parents will recognise the behaviour. Children who grew up with these platforms treat access as a technical puzzle to solve. As a result, every enforcement mechanism becomes a new challenge, and workarounds spread quickly through peer networks and online forums.
Canberra Responds with Bigger Fines
The federal government has responded with tougher measures rather than a retreat. Under proposed legislation, the maximum penalty for social media companies that fail to keep under-16s off their platforms will double to A$99 million. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made the government’s frustration plain. “It’s clear Big Tech are not doing enough to comply with the law. There are still too many children on social media,” he said. Communications Minister Anika Wells went further, accusing tech giants of “taking the mickey.” She declared that the doubled fines showed Australia was “not here to play games.”
The new legislation also strengthens the eSafety Commissioner’s hand. The regulator will gain the power to compel social media companies to provide evidence of the steps they have taken to stop under-16s from obtaining accounts. Moreover, investigations into potential breaches are already underway at Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, along with Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube. Meanwhile, the platforms face legal pressure from another direction. Reddit is challenging the ban in Australia’s highest court on free speech grounds, and the government has confirmed it will defend the lawsuit.
What This Means for Schools and Families
The enforcement gap places schools in a familiar position. The law says children under 16 should be off social media. Yet the data says most of them are still on it. Consequently, educators are left managing the practical consequences in classrooms and playgrounds regardless of what the legislation intends. For school leaders, the findings reinforce a lesson that digital safety experts have long argued. Legislation sets expectations. However, education must fill the gap between expectation and behaviour. Media literacy programmes, open conversations about online harm, and strong home-school partnerships therefore remain essential while the regulatory framework matures.
The stakes extend well beyond Australia. Governments worldwide are watching this experiment closely. The outcome will shape how other nations approach youth access to digital platforms. If doubled fines and stronger investigative powers push platforms toward genuine age verification, Australia will have written the playbook. If, on the other hand, usage rates stay above 80%, the lesson will be clear: regulation without reliable verification technology delivers limited protection. Either way, the next round of eSafety data will tell educators and policymakers whether the pressure on Big Tech is starting to work. The first nine months suggest the platforms still have plenty of ground to make up.
