Two thirds of young Australians still have access to social media despite under-16s ban, research reveals
Three in five Australian children aged between 12 and 15 still have access to one or more online account which should have been restricted as a result of the law.
More than 60 per cent of under 16-year-olds in Australia have continued to access social media despite the country’s world-first ban on this age group, research has shown.
Listen to this article
A poll commissioned by the Molly Rose Foundation (MRF) found three in five Australian children aged between 12 and 15 still have access to one or more online account - which should have been restricted as a result of the law, which came into effect last year.
The research, carried out online by YouthInsight between 12 March and 31 March, revealed that up to 53 per cent of underage users on TikTok, 53 per cent on YouTube and 52 per cent of Instagram users were still able to access their accounts on the platforms.
The polling also found 60 per cent of continuing Instagram and TikTok users said platforms had taken no action to remove or deactivate an account they had. This figure rose to 61 per cent for Snapchat users and 64 per cent for YouTube users.
Around half of children who used social media before the new rules – 51 per cent – said they felt the restrictions have made no change to their safety online.
Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, warned the polling raised “major questions about the effectiveness” of the ban.
Read more: Social media ban for under-16s ‘not the right approach’, says Google UK boss
Read more: What the UK Government is proposing on social media regulation
It comes ahead of a debate in Parliament about children’s digital rights.“These results raise major questions about the effectiveness of Australia’s social media ban and show it would be a high stakes gamble for the UK to follow suit now,”
Mr Burrows said. “Parents and children deserve better than a flawed ban that delivers a false sense of safety that quickly unravels.
“Proponents of a ban argue that it offers an immediate and decisive firebreak, but the early evidence from Australia shows it only lets tech firms off the hook and fails to give children the step change in online safety and wellbeing they need.
“The quickest and most decisive means to protect children is stronger regulation that finally calls time on egregious product safety failures, with a commitment to a new Online Safety Act in the upcoming King’s Speech.”
Ian Russell, whose 14-year-old daughter Molly died in 2017 after experiencing depression and viewing harmful online content, said: “The Prime Minister is right that tackling addictive and dangerous design choices is key.
“He must now put words into action with strengthened regulation that cuts to the heart of business models that put profit over safety.
“Keir Starmer has the chance to make the UK a world leader in online safety by following the evidence with robust new laws that give parents what they are rightly demanding.
“The cost is too high to get this wrong by rushing into an Australia-style ban that offers the perception of security but is letting children down in practice.”
The UK Government has proposed a broad power to limit children’s access to social media as part of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which could include curfews, time limits or targeted bans.Technology Secretary Liz Kendall has previously said her department “will look closely at the experience in Australia” before deciding which approach to take.
A consultation is under way to help the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) choose a next step.
But peers in the Lords have insisted on a default ban on under-16s using platforms deemed the most harmful, with a 12-month implementation window.
MPs and peers must agree on their approach to the Bill through a process known as ping-pong, with the next Commons debate set to take place on Wednesday.
The Government has proposed a broad power to limit children’s access to social media as part of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which could include curfews, time limits or targeted bans.
Lord Nash, who proposed an age limit on harmful social media as part of the Bill, said “techies” have taken a “cavalier approach” to content damaging to children.
“The Californian techies are some of the most able, innovative, entrepreneurial, wealth and job-creating people in the world,” the Conservative former minister told the Lords last month.
“But in relation to that cavalier approach that they have taken to harmful content online for our children, I think they’ve gone way too far in prioritising their commercial instincts, and we need to act now in a way that is truly effective.”
The Lords backed his ban, but MPs in the Commons voted to strip it out by a majority of 134, instead agreeing to give the Government the wider and more flexible power.
Peers voted to insist on the ban by a majority of 125, and as part of efforts to agree a final position, MPs will again debate the proposal this week
.A DSIT spokesperson said polling from Australia “underlines the importance of getting the next steps right”.
They added: “Our consultation on children’s wellbeing online looks at a breadth of options – from digital curfews and time limits on apps, to a social media ban.
“It is focused on ensuring that any action we take is technically sound, enforceable, and places real responsibility on the platforms themselves, to give children and parents the genuine protection they deserve.”