Australia's landmark legislation restricting social media use among those under 16 has largely failed to deter adolescent engagement during its initial months of implementation, according to research released this week by the University of Newcastle. The findings paint a sobering picture for policymakers across the region and beyond, suggesting that legislative action alone may prove insufficient to reshape digital behaviour among young users determined to maintain their online presence.
When the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 took effect in December 2025, Australia became the first nation globally to impose such restrictions on major platforms including TikTok, X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Snapchat. The legislation mandated that these companies implement reasonable measures to prevent minors from creating accounts, raising expectations that the policy would meaningfully reduce youth exposure to social media. Yet the University of Newcastle study, which tracked 408 adolescents aged 12 to 17 in the three months following the law's implementation, reveals a starkly different reality.
The research, published in the British Medical Journal and led by public health investigator Courtney Barnes, found that more than 85 per cent of teenagers under 16 continued using the restricted platforms. This remarkably high continuation rate suggests that young Australians view social media access as essential to their social lives, and that regulatory barriers alone do not substantially alter this preference. The persistence of usage indicates that the platforms' age verification systems, while present, have not created sufficient friction to prevent determined users from accessing services.
The study identifies three primary workarounds through which adolescents maintain their social media presence. Between 15 and 19 per cent reported using fake accounts with false information to circumvent age restrictions. A larger cohort—between 9 and 29 per cent—accessed platforms through accounts belonging to family members or friends, essentially hiding in plain sight within existing accounts rather than creating detectable unauthorised presences. An additional 11 per cent employed private browser modes and similar technical tools to bypass restrictions, demonstrating that even tech-unsophisticated adolescents possess sufficient knowledge to evade basic safeguards.
These findings carry particular significance for Malaysia and other Southeast Asian nations monitoring Australia's regulatory experiment. The region has seen growing concern about social media's impact on young people, from mental health deterioration to cyberbullying and exposure to harmful content. Several governments have contemplated similar age restrictions, viewing Australia's approach as a potential blueprint. However, the Newcastle study suggests that such legislation may require substantially more robust enforcement mechanisms than currently employed, including more sophisticated age verification technology and consistent compliance measures across platforms.
The age verification methods most commonly encountered by adolescents in the study—self-declared age and photo-based checks—emerged as inadequate barriers. These approaches depend on users providing truthful information or legitimate identification, neither of which presents a genuine obstacle to motivated teenagers. The research implicitly raises questions about what constitutes "reasonable steps" under Australian law, and whether self-verification processes meet that threshold. Platform operators may argue they have technically complied with the legislation, even as evidence demonstrates the ineffectiveness of their chosen methods.
Daily usage patterns documented in the study provide additional context. Social media consumption remained virtually unchanged among the youngest cohort (12-13-year-olds), experienced only modest decline among 14-15-year-olds, and actually increased among users aged 16 and above. This pattern suggests that the legislation has not reduced the time young Australians spend on these platforms, only shifted some usage to circumvention methods. The lack of significant change in overall engagement underscores the gap between regulatory intent and practical outcome.
Professor Luke Wolfenden, a behavioural scientist involved in the research, identified a crucial limitation: the effectiveness of age assurance systems ultimately depends on sustained, consistent enforcement over extended periods. Three months may simply be insufficient time to assess the legislation's true impact, as enforcement mechanisms mature and platforms develop more sophisticated verification approaches. The research team acknowledges that comprehensive evaluation may require years rather than months, during which both technological capabilities and enforcement intensity may substantially evolve.
The global dimension of Australia's policy experiment adds urgency to understanding these preliminary findings. Britain, France, Spain, Greece, Norway and Türkiye have all begun advancing similar legislation, watching Australia's implementation with keen interest. If the Australian approach proves ineffective in its current form, other nations may need to develop more stringent verification requirements—potentially including government-issued identification, biometric authentication, or other invasive measures—to achieve meaningful age enforcement. Alternatively, policymakers might conclude that age restrictions require complementary interventions addressing the underlying appeal of social media to adolescents.
For Malaysian stakeholders considering policy responses to youth social media use, the Australian experience offers cautionary lessons. Legislation establishing age limits, while politically attractive and symbolically important, may accomplish little without sophisticated technological enforcement and sustained regulatory commitment. The 85 per cent continuation rate among Australian teens suggests that regulatory frameworks alone cannot override the social and psychological factors drawing young people to these platforms. Any Southeast Asian nation pursuing similar restrictions should examine whether adequate infrastructure exists to enforce such policies meaningfully, and whether the costs of more robust enforcement mechanisms justify their implementation.
The study also raises questions about the effectiveness of delegating enforcement responsibility to private platforms with significant financial incentives to maximise user engagement. Platform operators face structural conflicts between compliance obligations and business models predicated on extensive user bases, suggesting that government-led verification systems or more rigorous liability frameworks might prove necessary. As other nations continue developing social media regulations, the Australian experience demonstrates that good intentions and legislative language do not automatically translate into altered adolescent behaviour, and that meaningful policy impact requires careful attention to implementation mechanisms and sustained enforcement resolve.
