Teen Social Media Ban Faces Reality Check: age Verification Tech Struggles with Accuracy
The ambitious plan to restrict social media access for teenagers is running into a meaningful hurdle: the technology meant to enforce it isn’t reliable enough. Experts predicted these challenges, and early testing confirms widespread concerns about both false positives and false negatives in age verification. This means the ban, framed by some as a “social media delay,” could inadvertently block legitimate users while failing to prevent underage access.
Early Warnings Ignored?
Concerns about the viability of any age-verification method have been voiced for months. Lisa Given, a computer science professor at RMIT, cautioned in June that parents would likely be “rude shock[ed]” by the system’s shortcomings. Her prediction is now materializing.
The core issue? The technology struggles to accurately determine age, leading to misidentification. This impacts both sides of the equation:
False Negatives: individuals over 16 incorrectly flagged as underage.
False Positives: Those under 16 incorrectly identified as being of age.
Testing Reveals Significant Error Rates
Recent reports detail alarming inaccuracies. Official document-based age verification yielded false positive and negative rates around 3%. Though,the more concerning data comes from facial and trait-based analysis.
Testing revealed a “gray zone” of two to three years around the age limit of 16. Worse, errors of up to four years in either direction were detected. This means a 15-year-old could be mistaken for a 19-year-old, or a 17-year-old could be blocked from accessing platforms. As reported, children as young as 15 were repeatedly misidentified as being in their 20s and 30s during government tests.
A Multi-Tech approach, But No Mandates
eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman-Grant addressed the National Press Club in June, framing the initiative as a “delay” rather than a full ban. She stated the implementation will rely on a range of technologies,without mandating specific solutions for social media companies.
Inman-Grant believes the technology to identify under-16s already exists. though, the onus will be on platforms to demonstrate the effectiveness of their chosen methods. They will be required to measure and report on their success, providing data for ongoing evaluation.
What This Means for You
if you’re a parent, you should prepare for potential disruptions. Your teen may encounter unexpected blocks or, conversely, be able to access platforms they shouldn’t. It’s crucial to:
Stay informed: Follow updates on the implementation and reported error rates.
Communicate with your teen: Discuss the ban and the potential for inaccuracies.
Monitor access: Don’t rely solely on the technology to protect your child. Open communication and parental controls remain vital.
The Path Forward: A Need for Realistic Expectations
While the intent behind the ban is laudable - protecting children online – the current technological landscape presents a significant challenge. A reliance on imperfect technology risks frustrating legitimate users and undermining the initiative’s goals.Moving forward, a obvious and data-driven approach, coupled with realistic expectations, is essential. The focus should shift towards continuous advancement and a layered approach to online safety, rather than a solely technology-dependent solution.
Sources:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/teen-social-media-ban-technology-concerns/105430458
* [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/teen-social-media-ban-technology-concerns/105718180](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/teen-social-media-ban-technology-concerns
