On December 11, a day after Australia implemented social media restrictions for individuals under 16, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese took to TikTok to announce that the affected teens were “starting their day a little differently.”

However, the video quickly attracted a flurry of responses:

“Still here Albo,” read one comment.

Another user cheekily noted, “Um, didn’t work.”

While Albanese has been clear that he doesn’t expect change to “happen overnight” when it comes to the ban, under-16 evasion is only one of the policy’s observed effects.

Six weeks on from the laws coming into force, here are five takeaways that experts, teens and parents have pointed out.

1. Many children are still on social media

Despite headlines reporting that 4.7 million accounts had been closed in the two days after the ban kicked off, 14-year-old Natasha from Sydney told The Feed she didn’t receive a single warning or message from any social media app.

“It was like the ban never happened,” said Natasha, who uses Snapchat and TikTok.

Her 12-year-old sister Jordan, however, did receive a notification from Snapchat, asking her to verify her age.

“With Snapchat, I got my account locked and then it wouldn’t let me do anything,” Jordan said.

But Jordan easily bypassed the lockout by using her sister’s face — despite Natasha also being under 16. And other platforms proved even easier to get around.

“TikTok was really easy to bypass,” Jordan said.

“I just got a notification. I just kept pressing ‘not now’ [on the pop-up warning] and it went away.”

Many other children contacted by The Feed reported similar experiences — either no disruption at all, or brief lockouts followed by simple workarounds.

Associate professor Joanne Orlando, a digital wellbeing researcher at Western Sydney University, told The Feed this lack of consistency aligns with what’s being seen nationally and casts doubt on claims about the scale of account removals.

She said that, by itself, an account deletion statistic “doesn’t really mean anything”.

“We don’t know how many accounts there were to start with … and because kids have multiple social media accounts, they might’ve been kicked off one account, but they still have six others going.”

However, eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant is pleased with the results thus far.

“It is clear that eSafety’s regulatory guidance and engagement with platforms is already delivering significant outcomes,” she said last week.

Inman Grant also stressed that it was the “responsibility of industry to prevent circumvention” and added that eSafety would continue to gather reports and information.

Meanwhile, Communications Minister Anika Wells said the reported deactivation of 4.7 million accounts was “a huge achievement”.

The major apps covered by the ban include Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube. Discord, Roblox and YouTube Kids were not included.

2. Facial age verification is easy to trick

At the centre of the ban is age-verification technology — particularly facial scanning. And that’s where many of the cracks are appearing, with kids quickly finding ways around the scans, according to Orlando.

“In order to bypass these scans, kids are doing things like getting a parent to do the scan for them, [or] their older cousin, their brother,” she said.

“I’ve heard of kids using a [fake] moustache — old-school technology is a way of bypassing it. So, it seems that these biometric face scans are very easily fooled.”

Jess, the mother of Natasha and Jordan, believes it’s unrealistic to assume technology alone can stop determined kids.

“I know how smart my children are,” Jess told The Feed.

“Most kids in their teens are going to be able to achieve whatever it is they want.”

Inman Grant acknowledged the ban would not immediately block all underage accounts but said this doesn’t necessarily mean the policy was failing.

“While some kids may find creative ways to stay on social media, it’s important to remember that just like other safety laws we have in society, success is measured by reduction in harm and in re-setting cultural norms,” she said.

“Speed limits, for instance, are not a failure because some people speed. Most would agree that roads are safer because of them. Over time, compliance increases, norms settle, and the safety benefits grow.”

3. Some kids feel left out

For Xenia’s daughter — who was locked out of social media, while her friends weren’t — the emotional impact was severe.

“[My daughter] was feeling really left out and ostracised … other kids are out doing things, and they post everything,” Xenia said.

Jordan agreed, saying she’d feel left out had the ban left her cut off from social media.

“I’d feel more disconnected … like I wasn’t being kept up with what’s happening. I’d feel left out.”

And children in minority groups, or from regional Australia, who once relied on communities on social media, may be further isolated, according to Timothy Koskie, a researcher at the University of Sydney’s Centre for AI, Trust and Governance.

“Marginalised and isolated teens … that don’t have access to broad peer groups are going to be further isolated. That’s a risk — everything to do with the regions in Australia is a very challenging system to navigate,” Koskie told The Feed.

Inman Grant has said the ban was “not designed to cut kids off from their digital lifelines or inhibit their ability to connect, communicate, create and explore”.

She also acknowledged “a constant challenge for parents having to juggle the urge to deny access to services they fear are harmful with the anxiety of leaving their kids socially excluded”.

However, she and other government figures have regularly defended the reforms as a net positive for youth mental health.

4. Parents are still divided on the ban

Many parents like Xenia, 49, support the ban.

Xenia told The Feed her 14-year-old daughter and her friends have become obsessed with social media and misuse it.

“They use it so ineffectively and cruelly towards each other. You’d have a bunch of girls hanging out, and then they’re posting all these pictures of themselves, and all the ones that aren’t invited feel so left out,” she said.

“Everybody puts, of course, all the best things on there and everybody looks amazing and they’re all using these filters and it’s just so fake … but they’re not old enough yet to go, ‘Oh, this isn’t actually real’.”

She’s also aware of how difficult it can be for some children to escape bullying when they are constantly connected to their peers online.

“[Bullying] is quite constant. They’ll go home and it will just keep going and they can’t not look at it.”

Four in five Australian adults said they supported the ban, according to a poll by Monash University in December. A Resolve Political Monitor poll from the same month found 67 per cent supported it, 8 per cent were undecided or neutral, and 15 per cent opposed it.

The Resolve poll also found that almost half of these parents (47 per cent) were “not confident” the restrictions would work, and only 29 per cent said they would fully enforce the ban, while 53 per cent would “pick and choose”.

Under the current rules, there are no penalties for under-16s who use social media platforms covered by the ban, or for parents or carers who facilitate that access.

Six weeks on, Jess believes allowing her daughters to stay online helped build trust.

“There are so many other big issues that we deal with as parents that I feel like this small concession keeps laying a trust bond down between us. So one day, if they ever really need help, they don’t feel like ‘I’m so disconnected from my mum, I’m not even going to bother asking her.’”

Jess also said the policy shifted responsibility onto families without giving them the tools to do it.

“I really wish the budget had been put into education, rather than: ‘Let me take it away from you with no education around it.’”

5. The ban has started important conversations

Australia’s move has drawn international attention, with the UK now considering a similar ban for under-16s.

Domestically, Orlando said it has reignited discussion around online safety.

“There’s been some good from the ban. It started a national conversation on social media safety, and that’s a good thing because we know social media can be a pretty dodgy place.”

She hopes the policy will spark deeper investment in social media education.

“We have education right now, cybersafety in schools, but it doesn’t necessarily go into what you need to know to be safe on social media — like understanding algorithms, echo chambers, sponsored content,” Orlando said.

“Once you turn 16, you don’t miraculously develop these skills. It’s long-term education.”

The eSafety Commission has described the restrictions as a “delay” — a pause on their access intended to give children more time to build digital literacy skills.

Koskie said that, while the ban’s long-term effects are yet to be seen, it’s a positive first step in protecting children from harmful content, abuse and scams.

“I think it would be wrong to even call this the start of something. I think this is just another part of the pathway that we’ve been on for quite a while,” he said.

“There’s a growing sense that social media’s current ways of operating — the algorithms they apply and the profit motives they have — may not necessarily be working.”