Australia’s digital ‘age wall’: What parents need to know about the under-16 social media ban
Tech giants face an unprecedented challenge as Australia moves to block teens from social media, despite warnings the ban could push minors to "darker corners" of the internet.
Australia will launch one of the world's most ambitious efforts to curb the mental health crisis linked to social media next week, banning children from Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and other popular platforms.
This proposed "age wall", which will begin next Wednesday, puts the onus squarely on global technology companies to verify the age of their users. Facebook owner Meta, Google and Snap have revealed how they will comply. But loopholes remain, with the shift set to redefine how millions of young Australians interact with the internet.
Here’s what will happen, how your child will be blocked and their age verified and what will become of their accounts.
How the social media ban will work
The ban forces social media companies to take “reasonable steps” to prevent children under 16 from creating accounts or using their services. The law targets platforms deemed “high-risk” due to design features like algorithmic feeds and targeted advertising.
Unlike systems that rely on centralised, government-run digital identification, the Australian model places the primary responsibility for age-gating directly onto the platforms.
This is expected to necessitate a multi-pronged approach: third-party digital ID verification against official documents, explicit parental consent, and the use of artificial intelligence to estimate user age based on behaviour.
It is this compliance mechanism that has become the policy’s central controversy. Major tech industry players have already voiced strenuous warnings regarding the profound security and privacy risks inherent in mandating the collection and storage of offical government identification data for nation’s entire user base.
Furthermore, the technical challenge of retroactively verifying the age of millions of exisiting accounts is an unprecedented task.
What platforms are excluded?
The Australian government has indicated a broad net, including general social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat, as well as discussion-focused services such as Reddit and community-centric apps such as Discord.
But the policy contains significant exclusions. Notably, the world-building and gaming platform Roblox, which provides extensive social and chat functions often used by children, is currently poised for exclusion. Similarly, the controversial image board 4chan remains outside the ban’s scope, a decision cyber security experts attribute to its lack of targeted advertising and engagement-maximising algorithms.
Other excluded platforms are WhatsApp, Messenger, YouTube Kids, GitHub, LEGO Play, Steam and Google Classroom.
What has happened to my child’s account
The main platforms are not happy, with Google describing the laws as “rushed” and “disappointed”. Still, the tech titans have announced immediate, wide-ranging changes that will restrict the online activity of minors.
While some children have already been locked out, others have had their accounts placed in a dormant state ready to be reactivated once they turn 16.
Here’s what the main platforms are doing:
Meta (Facebook, Instagram, Threads)
Meta began removing access to Instagram, Threads, and Facebook for those under 16 and blocking the creation of new accounts this week. Full removal of under-16 accounts is expected by December 10.
Messenger is not included in the law. Children under 16 will still be able to use it to connect with friends and family without access to the Facebook social network.
Meta is directing users to its “third-party partner”, Yoti, to verify their age by providing a government-issued ID or a video selfie. “Yoti deletes this information once your age has been verified,” Meta said.
Snapchat
Snapchat will block underage users from next Wednesday. It said if a user is under 16, their account will be preserved in a locked state for three years.
The user will be given this time to download their data. If they turn 16 at any point during that three-year period, they can verify their age to reinstate the account. Snap says users can verify their age via an Australian bank account or using photo ID such as a government-issued identification card.
Like Meta, Snap said its third-party service provider, k-ID, will scan and validate a user’s ID document and age.
“Snap will only collect a “yes/no” result on whether someone is above the minimum age threshold (e.g., 16). We will not receive your facial scans, bank account details, or any other personal information you provide during the age verification process.”
YouTube
Google-owned YouTube was originally exempt from the ban. But the government later changed its mind, causing outrage at the search engine giant.
Google said from next Wednesday, people aged 16 or older must sign into YouTube. Anyone under 16 will be automatically signed out, losing access to features that require an account, including subscriptions, playlists, “likes,” and wellbeing settings.
But there’s a loophole. Underage viewers can continue to watch YouTube while signed out. Existing content will not be deleted and will be available once a user turns 16.
Google says this means that parents will lose the ability to supervise their child’s account on YouTube, “as these accounts only work when they are signed in”. “Parents will no longer be able to use any controls they have set up, such as choosing an appropriate content setting or blocking specific channels”.
Verification is less clear. Google says it will “determine a user’s age based on the age associated with their Google account and other signals and will continue to explore how we implement and apply appropriate age assurance”
Will teens find ways around it?
Critics warn that this differential treatment could inadvertently push minors seeking unmonitored social interaction toward these less-regulated, darker corners of the internet.
In online forums, many teens and technically adept users are already discussing easy workarounds, suggesting the ban may be more symbolic than effective.
The primary anticipated evasion tactics include the use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to mask a person’s geographic location, making it appear as if they are accessing the service from an unrestricted country, and simply lying about their age during the account sign-up process.
While strict ID verification aims to combat the latter, it simultaneously increases the sensitive personal data held by social media companies.
How is social media harmful?
Facebook owner Meta has been accused of “kicking kids when they’re down”, targeting vulnerable teenagers with a barrage of advertisements based on their emotional state that ignites harm, including suicide, eating disorders and depression, a US Senate inquiry heard earlier this year.
The Australian originally revealed the tactics the $US1.6 trillion ($2.5 trillion) company used to monetise the mental health struggles of children as young as 13. What’s more, whistleblower Sarah Wynn-Williams said some of Meta’s own senior executives barred their children from using its products – swapping screens for wooden Montessori toys – because they knew how harmful their products were.
Anthony Albanese says: “The safety and mental health of our young people has to be a priority and my government will do all that we can to protect our young Australians, but also to provide support for parents and teachers who are dealing with these issues”.
What about adults?
The consequences of the “age wall” extend beyond minors. The effort to prove a user is 16 or older will likely force platforms to verify the age of all new – and potentially existing – Australian users, creating a significant data collection burden for companies and imposing an unprecedented demand for personal data from the public.
As the debate rages, the ultimate question remains whether this legislative effort will deliver on its promise to protect minors from the documented harms of social media, or if it will simply escalate an unwinnable “war on teen social media” that, like previous attempts at online regulation, struggles to keep pace with technological evasion.
More Coverage
Originally published as Australia’s digital ‘age wall’: What parents need to know about the under-16 social media ban
Today’s about plotting RBA’s rates trajectory; Telco bosses at inquiry
