Australia became the first country in the world to introduce a nationwide law aimed at preventing children under the age of 16 from having accounts on major social media platforms.
The law, introduced in December 2025, requires companies such as TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, and X to take reasonable steps to stop younger teenagers from creating or keeping accounts.
The goal of the policy is to protect young people from the possible harms linked to social media, including effects on mental health and well-being.
However, an early study published in The BMJ suggests the new restrictions have not yet led to major changes in how often many teenagers use social media.
To examine the early effects of the law, researchers surveyed 408 Australian teenagers between the ages of 12 and 17.
The first survey took place shortly before the new rules came into effect, and the second was conducted about three months later.
The teenagers answered questions about how often they used social media during the previous week, how much time they spent on these platforms each day, how they accessed their accounts, and whether they had encountered age-verification checks. They were also asked if they had tried to get around the restrictions.
The results showed that more than 85% of participants younger than 16 were still using social media platforms covered by the new law at the three-month follow-up. Most said they were using their own accounts rather than someone else’s.
About two-thirds of the younger participants reported encountering some type of age-verification system. The most common methods included simply entering their date of birth or uploading a selfie for age estimation. Despite these checks, many teenagers reported finding ways around the restrictions.
Some said they created fake accounts, while others used private or “incognito” internet browsing to avoid detection. These findings suggest that current age-verification systems may not be strong enough to fully enforce the new rules.
The researchers also looked at how social media habits changed over time. Daily use remained largely unchanged among children aged 12 and 13. Among teenagers aged 14 and 15, daily use fell slightly, from 78% before the law to 69% three months later. In contrast, daily use increased among participants aged 16 and older, who were not affected by the restrictions.
The amount of time spent on social media each day followed a similar pattern. It stayed fairly stable among the youngest group and those over 16, while teenagers aged 14 and 15 reported spending somewhat less time online.
The researchers caution that these findings should be interpreted carefully. The study involved a relatively small number of participants, all from New South Wales, and relied on teenagers reporting their own behavior, which may not always be completely accurate. The study also only examined the first three months after the law was introduced, so longer-term effects may still emerge.
Experts say it is also important to separate the effectiveness of the law itself from how well it is being enforced. If many young people can easily bypass age checks, it becomes difficult to judge whether the policy could be more successful with stronger implementation.
As other countries consider introducing similar age restrictions, researchers say long-term studies will be essential to understand whether these laws improve young people’s health and well-being, how social media use changes over time, and whether any unexpected consequences appear as teenagers adapt to the new rules.
