{"id":9759,"date":"2026-04-24T19:25:14","date_gmt":"2026-04-24T19:25:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/helpusdefend.com\/?p=9759"},"modified":"2026-04-24T19:33:57","modified_gmt":"2026-04-24T19:33:57","slug":"australias-teen-social-media-ban-tested","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/helpusdefend.com\/?p=9759","title":{"rendered":"Australia\u2019s Teen Social Media Ban Tested"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Social Media Ban Tested -<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

When Australia passed the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024, it aimed to push social media platforms to keep under-16s off their services.<\/span><\/p>

Instead of penalizing teens, the law targets companies like Meta, Snap, and Google, requiring them to verify users\u2019 ages or face major fines. Platforms have introduced facial estimation, behaviour tracking, and ID checks, but enforcement remains uneven\u2014and many teens are still active.<\/span><\/p>

As one teenager put it:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cWe just want to stay in contact with our friends.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

Another added:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cA ban won\u2019t fix the issues they think it will.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

Workarounds are everywhere. Teens are using fake birthdates, borrowing accounts, or shifting to smaller platforms and private groups. The result isn\u2019t less social media use\u2014it\u2019s different, often harder-to-monitor use.<\/span><\/p>

At the same time, new platforms are emerging with a different approach. One example is 65square, which is positioning itself as a safety-first alternative. After each user is verified with a passport, facial analysis happens at every login and kids get grouped together in different age brackets for maturing age appropriate experiences. Adults can\u2019t message or see kids and the same is true for children in different age brackets.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

The goal is not just to restrict access, but to actively protect vulnerable users while they are online while giving them freedom to be themselves.<\/span><\/p>

This reflects a broader shift in thinking. While Australia\u2019s law tries to reduce harm by limiting access, platforms like 65square are attempting to reduce harm within the experience itself.<\/span><\/p>

The contrast is important. Age bans create friction, but they don\u2019t eliminate risk. Safety-focused design, on the other hand, assumes young people will still be online\u2014and tries to make those spaces safer.<\/span><\/p>

Australia\u2019s policy has forced platforms to act, but it hasn\u2019t fully achieved its core goal. Teens are still online. They\u2019re just navigating the system differently.<\/span><\/p>

References<\/h4>