Data shows Australian teen social media use rebounding despite ban

Key points

• Qustodio data shows 25.9% of 13-15-year-olds use TikTok, just 1% below pre-ban levels, while usage among 10-12-year-olds is nearly identical to pre-ban rates.
• Australia’s eSafety Commissioner is investigating five major platforms (Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube) for non-compliance and 'dirty tricks' to undermine the law.
• Communications Minister Anika Wells introduced amendments to increase fines and expand enforcement powers, which passed the House of Representatives and are under Senate inquiry.
• New Zealand has proposed similar legislation, with potential fines up to 10% of global revenue for non-compliant tech firms.
• Meta agreed to a settlement imposing stricter time limits for under-18s, including a 2-hour daily cap and night-time blocks, as a potential middle-ground alternative to outright bans.

Background

Australia implemented its world-first social media ban for under-16s in December 2025, aiming to protect children from predatory algorithms and online bullying. Earlier reports in August 2026 indicated that over 80% of teens remained online within three months, with weak age verification allowing easy circumvention. France’s Constitutional Council recently struck down a similar ban, citing violations of minors' freedom of expression, prompting revised legislation. The current debate centers on whether outright bans are effective or if algorithmic regulation and time limits offer better solutions.

How outlets are covering it

Business Insider and France 24 emphasize the ban’s ineffectiveness, citing Qustodio data showing usage rebounding to pre-ban levels. They highlight that children easily bypass restrictions, suggesting the policy has failed its core objective. The Nightly focuses on the legislative response, detailing the government’s push to strengthen enforcement and fines, while noting parliamentary dissent. Critics like the Greens and independent senators argue the ban is ineffective and advocate for regulating 'toxic algorithms' instead. The government defends the policy as a public health measure, despite evidence of widespread circumvention. Outlets disagree on whether the ban should be strengthened, abandoned, or replaced with alternative measures like time limits or algorithmic regulation.

Why it matters

The failure of Australia’s ban highlights the challenges of enforcing digital age restrictions and the ease with which youth circumvent them. It influences global policy debates, as countries like New Zealand, France, and the UK consider similar measures. The outcome will shape how governments balance child safety with digital rights and whether they pursue bans, algorithmic regulation, or parental controls as primary tools.

What to watch

The Senate will review the amendments to strengthen the ban, with a decision expected after the September 7 parliamentary session. The eSafety Commissioner will continue investigating non-compliance by major platforms. New Zealand’s proposed legislation may advance, potentially imposing significant fines on tech firms. Meta’s settlement regarding time limits for under-18s may serve as a model for other countries seeking alternatives to outright bans.