Social media ban: Families, teens question new access and verification rules — as it happened

And that’s it for today!

Thank you for sharing your thoughts, concerns and questions about this world-first social media ban.

It’s been great having you here.

You can look back on today’s developments below, or download the ABC News app and subscribe to our range of news alerts for the latest updates.

Take care.

Everyone I know and all my friends still use social media. It seems like the ban isn’t working. Although I have followed the rules, it seems as though the majority of kids and teens still use social media. But it is mainly because the parents decide to let them keep it. — Lachlan

From my 11 year old: We wouldn’t need this law if the social media companies just cared about kids. She gets it. — Jodie

My grandson and I live at opposite ends of the state. We had a lovely couple of years’ communicating on snap chat . With hilarious funny photo moments. It feels like a loss now we can’t do this. — Cheryl

Remember when the government tried to ban illegal download pirate sites? How did that work out? It will just be a game of whack-a-mole. Government creates a new barrier, kids will find away through it. So whether or not you agree with the ban is irrelevant. It doesn’t work. — Ryan

You may notice a number of Australian landmarks bathed in green and gold tonight.

Authorities say it’s to mark the start of the social media ban.

The Sydney Harbour Bridge will light up from 8pm AEDT.

“The NSW government fully supports the social media age restriction,” a Premier’s Department spokesperson said.

“Illuminating the Sydney Harbour Bridge is a sign to NSW, Australia and the world that we want our young people to be safe online.”

Brisbane’s Story Bridge and Kangaroo Point Bridge are also among the national landmarks set to be illuminated.

We’ve been getting a lot of questions throughout the day about what apps are included in the ban.

Here’s a refresher for you:

It’s day one of the social media ban and, unsurprisingly, it hasn’t been a smooth launch.

Many children have already been able to get around the ban in various ways, with age assurance systems misclassifying users and workarounds such as VPNs and makeup tricks being used.

The government admitted the ban wouldn’t be perfect or instantaneous but said the loopholes that allow teens to circumvent the ban would not stay open forever.

Parents have contacted the ABC today, sharing their thoughts on the ban and its ineffectiveness.

You can read more about what they said here:

Jayshri Kulkarni is a professor of psychiatry at Monash University.

She said she was “pleased about the ban coming into effect today”.

“There are lots of logistics that need to be ironed out about how it will be policed and so on,” she told News Channel earlier today.

She added there will likely be some “denial” and anger from the young community.

“We will see some anger with the 15-16 -year-olds,” she said.

“We will have some anger about it, there will be some legal action, all sorts of responses but in the end I think it will be an important step forward to actually halting some of the neuroscientific aspects of addiction and behavioural change that has been an issue for many adolescents.”

Using social media platforms has helped me connect with people who share my interests in ways which would not be possible for me to do in-person, especially as someone with significant social anxiety. I know that finding support groups can also be really difficult for LGBT+ and neurodivergent people among others in real life and being able to join a community online can be something of a lifeline. Personally, using social media platforms has really helped me overall when growing up and I’m not sure I would be around today if it wasn’t for being able to find communities on there. — Sam

As a grandparent of 6, under 6 grand kids I am completely in favour of this ban. However, a lot of the “burden” of making it work will fall on parents and on the U16s themselves of course. Also given the prevalence of the use of social media to communicate, can kids still use Whats App and SMS. — Nicci

Bit sad today. I understand the reasons for the ban – but there are so many lives poorer today because it benefits the majority. Thinking especially of those half siblings whose parents are at loggerheads, but used to connect, play games etc online. Big gap in so many lives now. — Gen Dorian

My just turned 12 year old had to do a face check on Roblox to access chat and despite me setting her age via parental controls, they overrode them and put her into the 13-15 group. Her twin brother hasn’t been asked to do it at all. My 15 year old hasn’t lost access to any accounts but as she uses her Instagram for art commissions, that account has my date of birth to avoid it being deleted. — Naomi

In a statement issued from New York this morning, UNICEF said it welcomed Australia’s — and other countries’ — move to introduce social media bans for children, but warned age restrictions weren’t enough to ensure kids’ safety online.

It stressed the need for governments, regulators and companies to collaborate on creating digital environments that are safe, inclusive, and respect children’s rights.

“While UNICEF welcomes the growing commitment to children’s online safety, social media bans come with their own risks, and they may even backfire.

“Social media is not a luxury — for many children, especially those who are isolated or marginalised, it is a lifeline providing access to learning, connection, play, and self-expression. What’s more, many children and young people will still access social media, whether through workarounds, shared devices, or turning to less regulated platforms, ultimately making it harder to protect them.

“Age restrictions must be part of a broader approach that protects children from harm, respects their rights to privacy and participation, and avoids pushing them into unregulated, less safe spaces. Regulation should not be a substitute for platforms investing in child safety. Laws introducing age restrictions are not an alternative to companies improving platform design and content moderation.”

UNICEF has called on social media companies to implement five reforms to support children’s and parents’ needs. You can read them here.

We’ve been hearing from under 16s today who say they haven’t been kicked off their social media accounts yet.

eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant was asked how long it could be before the majority of kids’ accounts are shut down.

She says it’ll be an “iterative process” over the coming weeks and months.

“We’re not going to presuppose what this will look like,” she said.

“We’ll do this on our own terms and in our own time.

“I don’t think we’re talking six months or a year.”

Ms Inman Grant says TikTok, X and Reddit were the last platforms to communicate with their user bases – therefore, they may be “a little bit behind” on some of their deployments.

“We know that some of these platforms have billions of users and their infrastructure is based overseas,” she said.

“So it can take some time to replicate through the system.”

An Australian teenager under 16 has created a video diary documenting their experiences on the morning of the world-first social media ban.

You can watch here:

Loading…

We published a TikTok earlier today about the social media ban, but a lot of under 16s tell us not much has changed.

Here’s what you had to say in the comments:

Nah I’m still here.

No not for me.

My main (account) got banned so I just made a new one.

TikTok yes, everything else no.

None of the under 16 kids (I) know are banned.

Julie Inman Grant, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, has just spoken on ABC’s Afternoon Briefing.

She says this social media ban would always have “teething problems”.

“Yes, there are going to be kids that fall through the cracks,” she said.

“Do I think this is Armageddon or the end of the policy? No.

“I think this is what happens with technology.

“I have faith with our engagement, and also with our information-gathering powers and … that the companies will improve their game and start stepping up.”

One of our reporters in Sydney had a go at trying to sign up to a range of social media platforms as an underage user, by entering a fake date of birth.

You can see what that looked like in action here:

Loading…

Our reporters went out to a school in Sydney this morning to hear from some children on the benefits they think the social media ban might offer.

Here’s what six kids had to say:

“I think it’s going to be a good thing, because there’s going to be a lot of harmful content out there that is going to be exposed to younger people.”

“I think it’s a good thing, because you could think that you’re speaking to a kid your age but it could really be an older person undercover trying to meet up with you or something.”

“I’m going to follow the rules because I know the rules are for the better and they can only help the community and myself.”

“I, weirdly enough, think it’s good, because you can use other apps like WhatsApp to text people and it stops you from getting distracted from learning.”

“It’ll probably be good for our mental health because our screen time will go down.”

“I think 1765388647 we’ll spend more time socialising and more time outside doing sports and all that.”

Loading…

That’s an important question, Jack.

The list of banned platforms isn’t carved in stone but in theory, if a platform is popular with under 16s and is also a clear fit with the definition under the law, it’s closer to the top of the list.

Our tech reporter Ange Lavoipierre offers her insight:

“I totally understand that this policy looks like it’s been unevenly applied in some ways, and that’s definitely been a consistent criticism.

The eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant was specifically asked about 4chan at a Senate Estimates hearing a couple of months back, and she described it then as an “image board” which suggests she didn’t think it was a straightforward fit for being captured under the definition set out in the law. The other reason she offered at the time was that her office was prioritising the platforms where the greatest number of under 16s were hanging out.

She also didn’t rule out that 4chan might eventually be included — which is something we hear a lot these days — that the list of banned platforms could grow. It’s an acknowledgement of that other very real concern you raise, that the regulator seems to share — that the policy might push young people onto other, less regulated parts of the internet. It seems like they’re hoping to be able to respond to that problem as it comes up.”

Thanks for your question, Michael.

New platforms can be added to the banned list by the communications minister, who says she’ll be working with the eSafety commissioner to identify “migratory patterns” — e.g. if users are logging out of Snapchat and going to Lemon8 — and what harms young people are being exposed to on these unbanned platforms, says tech reporter James Purtill.

“For the first 10 platforms subject to the ban, eSafety wrote to each of them and asked whether they believed the ban should apply to them.

Reddit, for instance, said it shouldn’t, because it wasn’t primarily a social media platform.

eSafety disagreed, and now Reddit is part of the ban.

Companies can ultimately appeal the decision through the courts. Reddit says it’s considering doing so — and others may too.”

Parents have contacted the ABC today, sharing their thoughts on the ban.

Here’s what they told us:

“My son is all for it, he is 13 and is looking forward to all the extra time he will have to do other things freely admitting the algorithm traps him for periods of time without him noticing. He said he will go to legitimately look something up then realise twenty minutes later he just started scrolling mindlessly. — Stuart, Sydney

“My thirteen-year-old daughter still has access to all her social media accounts this morning, she verified her age via facial scanning, I am hoping that they are still working their way through and she will be booted off soon, if not then it’s a fail for us.” — Alison, Sydney

“My son is almost 16 and has been kicked of Snapchat already on the 9th December but my daughter who is 14 still hasn’t been asked to verify her age on the app. We know multiple children who are 13 who passed the Face ID scan.” — Melissa, Perth

“My 13-year-old son has passed the age verification face scan by hiding his teeth and scrunching up his face. It guessed his age as 30+. In real life he passes for a 10-year-old.” — Matt, Brisbane 

“I am in favour of this legislation, but it isn’t being well implemented. My teen is isolated because she hadn’t lied about her age and every one of her friends has. She now is excluded socially. If we are going to do this, we need to do it well across the board or it will cause more harm than good.” — Aslee, Melbourne 

Under-16s have contacted the ABC today, sharing their thoughts on the ban.

Many have said they were able to get around age-verification or haven’t been kicked off.

Here’s what they told us:

“I am under the age of 16 and have not been banned on any platform. Many of my friends in my grade are also under 16 and not one of them has been banned yet.” — Julius, Brisbane 

“Almost all my friends got through the safety restrictions of the ban by using AI to detect their face. It is very flawed and all they needed to do was scrunch up their face to get past the restrictions. I believe the only viable option would be for people to use their driver’s licence to get into an app. I just want to walk with my friends without them scrolling forever.” — Charlie, Newcastle

“The social media ban does not work. With the steps I personally have taken, and so many others nationwide would have, I can say it does not actually work, at all. This seems like a rushed law that just doesn’t look like it’ll work on paper and proves that in practice.” — Sebastian, Perth 

Our Indonesian team spoke to several Indonesian parents in Australia about the social media ban.

Some said they were still “confused” about how the ban would be implemented.

Dian Fikriani said she didn’t know whether her 14-year-old son would still be allowed to access other people’s social media accounts.

Other parents say they appreciated the Australian government’s initiative.

“We do have concerns about children’s use of social media, so the idea is good,” said Nuri Hinduan, another Indonesian mother in Melbourne.

“We value the government’s efforts to think of our children.”

Ms Hinduan said she also hoped that there would be follow-up sessions at schools to help improve social media literacy.

The Indonesian parents told the ABC that they believed social media was a “double-edged sword” and that parents bore the significant responsibility of looking after their children’s wellbeing.

“Of course, we hope our kids spend more of their time outside, playing with their friends, reading books, and, as parents, should try to accommodate that,” Ms Hinduan said.

Indonesia is among the countries considering following Australia in implementing a social media ban for children under 16, a topic that also has sparked heated debate in the country in recent months.

Thanks for your question, Amanda.

The ban applies to users who are “ordinarily a resident of Australia”.

That generally means having been in Australia for at least 200 days of the last 12 months, explains tech reporter James Purtill.

So short-term visitors are probably exempt.

“If they do end up being blocked, it could be a long wait to get their account back,” he says.

“The eSafety commissioner has said platforms won’t consider a person as being outside of Australia unless they’ve been overseas for three months.”