SYDNEY—Seven months after Australia barred children under 16 from social media, the bold experiment shows cracks. Most kids never left. Now lawmakers have hit pause on fixes meant to force tech giants to comply. The setback comes as other nations eye similar restrictions. They watch closely.
The ban took effect Dec. 10, 2025. Platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube faced orders to prevent under-16s from holding accounts. Officials celebrated early wins. They reported more than 4.7 million accounts removed, deactivated or restricted in the first weeks, according to the eSafety Commissioner.
Reality hit harder. By March 2026, the commissioner found seven in 10 children who had accounts on restricted platforms before the ban remained active on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok. Many simply declared themselves over 16. Others submitted selfies that age-verification systems accepted without question. The The Next Web laid out the numbers in detail this week.
Julie Inman Grant, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, grew frustrated. In April she signaled plans for court action against those four platforms plus YouTube. She argued they failed to take reasonable steps to exclude children. Progress looked better on X, Kick, Reddit, Threads and Twitch. Those earned a pass for now.
The government moved to act. This week it introduced amendments. They would double maximum fines from A$49.5 million to A$99 million. More important, they would expand Inman Grant’s powers. She could demand not just information but internal documents, board minutes and communications about compliance efforts. The changes would also let her compel data from third-party age-assurance providers to verify company claims.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese pushed hard. He told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. that passage yesterday would have allowed immediate demands for records. “So then fines can be issued,” he said. Albanese warned the delay gives platforms time to delete evidence. “It is outrageous the delay because what the eSafety Commissioner has said very clearly is that that will allow the platforms to go and just delete a whole lot of material,” he added in comments reported by multiple outlets including BBC News.
But the center-left Labor government lacks a Senate majority. Opposition Liberals and the Greens joined forces Thursday. They sent the bill to an eight-week inquiry. Communications Minister Anika Wells had received monthly updates from Inman Grant since March. “We are not seeing improvements,” she said this week.
Sarah Henderson, the opposition’s communications spokesperson, called the original law half-baked. “It was rushed, badly implemented and not working,” she argued. Greens Senator David Shoebridge questioned the need to double fines that had never been issued. Both parties had backed the initial 2024 legislation that passed with strong support.
New data keeps piling up. A study published in June by The Guardian found four in five under-16s still using social media three months after the law started. About 85% reported continued access. The BMJ reported on the government’s penalty increase just yesterday, noting mixed results from the first official compliance report.
Tech companies face pressure. Meta, Snap, ByteDance and Google have defended their efforts. They point to self-declaration tools, selfie checks and other age gates. Critics say these methods prove too easy to fool. And privacy concerns complicate stronger biometric or ID-based verification. The better the privacy protections, the less effective the ban appears, as legal scholar Michael Geist noted in recent analysis shared widely on X.
Yet the Australian experience has not slowed global momentum. The UK announced in June a ban on under-16s from apps including TikTok, Instagram and YouTube. Rules could take effect in spring 2027. France, Denmark, Spain and others have moved on similar age limits. Canada introduced its own Safe Social Media Act in June. Brazil acted even earlier with restrictions for under-14s.
All confront the same obstacle. Laws pass with public support. Enforcement proves far harder. Platforms resist deep access to their systems. Age verification that works without invading privacy remains elusive. Parents want protection from harmful content, addictive algorithms and mental health risks. But many also want their teens to stay connected for school, sports and social ties.
The Senate inquiry will examine the proposed powers. It will hear from technology firms, child safety groups, privacy advocates and parents. Eight weeks buys time for lobbying. It also risks further erosion of the ban’s credibility. Some kids have already migrated to unregulated apps or used VPNs to bypass blocks.
Wells and Inman Grant continue monthly briefings. The government insists it will not back down. Albanese has vowed to make the law bulletproof against legal challenges. Recent Reuters reporting detailed his comments from late June about preparing stronger enforcement.
Advocates who pushed for the original ban express disappointment. They argue the delay rewards noncompliance. Others see the inquiry as responsible oversight. Rushed law produced weak results, they say. Better to get the next version right.
Early government figures painted a success story. Nearly five million accounts gone in days. Platforms claimed swift action. Independent checks told another tale. Self-reported ages and flimsy photo verification let most children slip through. One compliance update from eSafety in March painted the gap clearly.
Conversations with teenagers reveal the human side. Many admitted lying about their age within minutes of the ban’s start. Others borrowed older siblings’ credentials or used friends’ phones. The pull of social connection outweighed legal risk since no penalties fall on children or parents.
Industry insiders watch the numbers. App store operators could face new obligations under the amendments. Third-party verification firms might open their algorithms to scrutiny. Double fines would sting. Yet without ironclad evidence of systemic failure, prosecutions could drag.
The coming inquiry will test competing claims. Tech companies say they have invested heavily in compliance tools. Regulators counter that those tools fail basic tests. Privacy experts warn expanded data demands could set dangerous precedents. Child development researchers point to studies linking heavy social media use to anxiety, sleep disruption and body image issues.
Australia finds itself in uncharted territory. First to enact a nationwide under-16 ban. First to discover the enforcement walls. Its struggles offer a preview for every country following. Passing legislation brings applause. Making it stick demands persistence, technical ingenuity and political will.
Albanese condemned the Senate move as giving platforms breathing room they don’t deserve. Henderson and Shoebridge countered that tougher, more carefully crafted rules would serve children better. The debate continues. So does the access. For now, the ban on paper looks stricter than the ban in practice. And the world keeps watching.
Australia’s Social Media Ban for Children Stumbles as Senate Delays Tougher Rules first appeared on Web and IT News.