One month after Australia implemented a pioneering law designed to shield young people from harmful online content, the landscape is revealing a complex mix of evasion and unintended consequences. The legislation, which requires social media platforms to verify users' ages and restrict access for those under 14, has not been the clear-cut success some policymakers envisioned.
The Great Digital Workaround
Despite the government's intentions, a significant number of tech-savvy teenagers are successfully circumventing the new restrictions. Experts and parents report that young people are using a variety of methods to maintain their online presence. These tactics include using virtual private networks (VPNs) to mask their location, borrowing or creating accounts with false birthdates, and accessing platforms through less restrictive web browsers instead of official apps.
Dr. Joanne Orlando, a respected researcher in digital wellness, confirms this trend. She notes that the law has inadvertently created a 'cat-and-mouse' game, where platforms implement barriers and young users, often with superior digital literacy than their parents, quickly find ways over them. This dynamic challenges the core effectiveness of the age-gating approach.
Isolation on the Other Side of the Gate
While some teens are dodging the ban, another group is experiencing a different, more troubling outcome: social isolation. For children who are complying with the rules or whose parents are strictly enforcing them, being locked out of major social platforms has meant being cut off from their peer groups.
Dr. Orlando highlights that social media is often the primary digital 'town square' for young Australians. It's where friendships are maintained, plans are made, and shared cultural moments happen. Removing access, without providing alternative spaces for connection, can leave compliant teens feeling excluded and lonely. This unintended side effect raises questions about the social cost of such blanket bans.
Expert Calls for Education Over Prohibition
The mixed results after the first month have amplified calls from child safety advocates and researchers for a more nuanced approach. Many argue that heavy-handed restriction is less effective than comprehensive digital literacy education. The goal, they suggest, should be to equip young people with the critical thinking skills to navigate online spaces safely, rather than simply building walls that they will inevitably try to climb.
Proponents of this view believe that teaching children about privacy, recognising misinformation, and managing online relationships is a more sustainable long-term solution. They contend that these skills empower young users far beyond their teenage years, preparing them for a lifelong digital existence.
As Australia continues to enforce this world-first experiment in social media regulation, the coming months will be critical. Policymakers will be watching closely to see if the initial workarounds and reports of isolation persist, or if the platforms' age verification technologies become more robust. The ultimate measure of success will be whether the law genuinely improves child safety online without harming their social development—a balance that has proven difficult to achieve in its first major test.
