Australia’s Social Media Ban Faces Its Toughest Critics: Teens

Australia’s Bold Move Against Teen Social Media Use

Australia is preparing to roll out one of the world’s most ambitious — and controversial — attempts to regulate social media. Starting this December, platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok could face fines of up to A$49.5 million (about $32.17 million USD) if they don’t take “reasonable steps” to block users under 16. The aim is to protect young people from issues like cyberbullying, toxic body image standards, and misogynistic content.

The law arrives amid growing global anxiety over the effects of social media on youth mental health. Governments from Britain to Singapore are considering or testing their own restrictions, while several U.S. states, including Florida, have launched legal battles over teen access to social platforms. Even outspoken tech moguls like Elon Musk — who’s positioned himself as a champion of free speech and opponent of platform regulation — have chimed in, with Musk deriding Australia’s eSafety regulator as a “censorship commissar.”

But as Australian officials prepare to tighten the digital gates, a familiar wildcard is already complicating matters: the teenagers themselves.

Teens Put the Age-Checking Tech to the Test

In May, a group of about 30 students in Perth volunteered to trial five age-estimation tools under the supervision of tech contractor KJR. The software uses facial analysis to estimate a person’s age, sometimes down to the exact month. Thirteen-year-old Jasmine Elkin, one of the participants, was startled by its precision — but immediately skeptical about its real-world potential.

“People are always going to find a way to get past it,” Elkin remarked. “They can get their brother or sister to take a photo. There’s really nothing you can do about that.”

And she isn’t alone in doubting the plan’s long-term effectiveness. Many child protection experts, tech firms, and even the trial’s organizers have raised concerns that while the software largely works as advertised, it’s unlikely to hold up against a determined, tech-savvy generation.

Trial organizers quickly discovered the students’ knack for technology. They sped through their testing assignments so fast that the supervisors had to double the number of products tested and cut session times in half as the project progressed.

Andrew Hammond, general manager at KJR, clarified that the goal wasn’t to deliberately undermine the software. “It hasn’t been our intention to pull apart the software, rip the guts out and work out every way you could circumvent it,” he said. However, the speed and ease with which the teenagers navigated the systems underscored a critical challenge for policymakers.

A Glimpse Into a Restricted Digital Future

For the teenagers involved, the trial wasn’t just a tech demo — it was a preview of what life might look like once the new law kicks in. Fourteen-year-old Canberra student Charlie Price admitted that while he uses social media often, he could live without it. “I know people that will get really shocked and upset,” he added, noting that he’s already planning to gather phone numbers from his online friends before December.

Some testers like Emanuel Casa, 15, said they didn’t actively try to beat the system during the trial, but the knowledge that workarounds exist was never far from anyone’s mind. According to Hammond, selfie-based software — sometimes requiring users to change facial expressions — proved the most accurate and efficient, while age-verification via credit card details was a non-starter since most teens don’t have their own cards. Other systems, like those requiring users to hold up their hands in various positions, delivered age estimates that were too broad to reliably enforce a 16-year-old cutoff.

Notably, the trial revealed some dramatic misfires. In one case, a product guessed a 13-year-old’s age as 42. These inconsistencies have raised questions about what level of accuracy would be considered acceptable for national rollout.

“There’s no measure right now for what ‘good’ is,” Hammond pointed out. “Do they need to be 70% effective, 80%, or 100%? The government hasn’t indicated yet that they’ll mandate a particular standard.”

No Perfect System — Yet

Meanwhile, a simpler form of age-gating — requiring users to enter a birthdate — also fell short. At Radiant Life College in Queensland, 35 students, along with a few parents and teachers, took part in testing one such tool. Some students entered their real birthdays; others faked older ages, though not always successfully. “I think the mathematics caught a couple of kids out,” joked Nathanael Edwards, the school’s principal.

For now, no additional trials are scheduled. Hammond noted that it will be up to the government to decide what level of reliability it’s willing to accept. The final trial report is due by the end of July, with an overview of the findings set to be presented on June 20.