Australia’s under-16 social media ban is proving difficult to enforce, with the vast majority of children still accessing banned platforms and parents left to carry much of the burden, according to new research.
The report, conducted by global data and insights platform Pureprofile, surveyed 1,025 parents, teachers, and young Australians. It found that in the six months since the ban’s inception, guardrails and age verification methods are largely failing to block under-16 access.
78% (compared to 84% in 2025) of children surveyed had sustained access to the banned platforms, which include Instagram, Youtube, Tiktok and Snapchat.
Two in five (41%) of under-16s admit to trying to subvert the ban, while 43% of parents stated they’re aware that their children have tried. Public support for the world-first ban remains high with 76% of parents still in support.
ADVERTISEMENT
Martin Fitz, CEO of Pureprofile said in a release: “Six months post-ban, the findings suggest many of the concerns raised before the ban have materialised.”
“While support for the policy remains strong, parents are under overwhelming pressure to enforce it,” he said.
The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 introduced an obligation for social media platforms to reasonable steps to exclude Australian under-16s from their platforms.
If reasonable steps are not taken, courts can order civil penalties of up to $49.5m, but in the absence of proven breaches, it’s not clear what that entails.
The eSafety Commissioner’s Social Media Minimum Age Regulatory Guidance guide outlines a mix of age assurance methods, including age estimation using biological or behavioral signals, age inference based on indirect data signals, and age verification calculated from a confirmed date of birth.
A popular method is face-scanning age verification, where a phone’s camera will scan an individual’s face to determine their age.
Pureprofile’s research found that only 31% of under 16s had undergone face-scanning age verification, and of those, roughly half said they were determined to be over 16.
With platforms failing to technically enforce the ban, the research found that responsibility was falling on parents.
More than half of parents (57%) say they have attempted to enforce the under-16s social media ban themselves, but many are struggling, with 42% reporting it has been difficult to do so.
A side-effect of the ban has been teens moving their online activity out of sight rather than out of risk. The report found under-16s are switching platforms rather than leaving online spaces, moving to options like Youtube Kids and Discord (not banned), while use of banned apps including Tikkok, Instagram and Snapchat has actually risen among 8 to 12-year-olds.
The report outlines that 29% of children aged 13-15 and more than a third (37%) of those aged 8-12 report exposure to violent or graphic content.
35% of children aged 8-15 have encountered bullying, harassment or hateful material, while others report exposure to sexual, age-inappropriate, racist, or self-harm and eating disorder-related content. The report also found that parents of children exposed to this content are more likely to care about the enforcement of the ban.
Despite failures cited in the report, Pureprofile also found there has been positive influence — parents and children report reported enjoying more offline and outdoor activities since the ban (77%, up from 44% a year earlier).
Both parents and children report a shift towards offline activities such as reading, sport and creative hobbies, although some children are spending more time gaming, watching TV, or viewing Youtube under supervision.
“It’s clear the ban’s success or failure now rests firmly on what’s happening at home, at least until enforcement technology catches up to the reality on the ground,” said Fitz.
