Snapchat's Under-16 Social Media Ban Leaves Gaps in Protection, Experts Warn
More than 415,000 Australian Snapchat users under 16 have had their accounts disabled or locked as part of the country's compliance with the under-16s social media ban. However, concerns have been raised that significant gaps remain in the implementation of this measure, potentially leaving vulnerable teens exposed to online risks.
In December, Australia became one of the first countries to introduce a nationwide ban on people aged under 16 accessing its major social media platforms. The move was hailed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as a success, with over 4.7 million accounts across the ten banned platforms being disabled or removed in the initial days following the ban's implementation.
Despite the progress made so far, Snapchat has acknowledged that its facial age estimation technology is not foolproof and can be easily bypassed by clever teenagers. The company claims to continue locking more accounts daily but admits there are "significant gaps" in the implementation of the ban that could undermine its effectiveness.
In practice, this means some young people under 16 may be able to circumvent protections and lose access to their accounts while others over 16 may incorrectly lose access. Additionally, teenagers are likely to turn to alternative messaging apps that escaped the ban, leaving them vulnerable to online exploitation.
Experts warn that policymakers need to reassess whether the law is achieving its intended outcomes and consider more effective measures to protect young people online. The eSafety commissioner has expressed concern over the deployment of facial age estimation technology without proper "liveness tests," which can lead to false positives.
As part of its efforts to comply with the ban, Snapchat has been trialing improved age assurance technologies. However, these initiatives are not yet widespread and more needs to be done to ensure the protection of vulnerable teens.
The eSafety commissioner's focus on the first 10 platforms has raised questions about the comprehensive nature of the ban. With some smaller companies having fewer than 100,000 users, concerns have been raised that these firms may not receive adequate attention from regulators.
Overall, while progress has been made in implementing the under-16s social media ban, there are significant gaps in protection that need to be addressed to ensure young people's online safety.
More than 415,000 Australian Snapchat users under 16 have had their accounts disabled or locked as part of the country's compliance with the under-16s social media ban. However, concerns have been raised that significant gaps remain in the implementation of this measure, potentially leaving vulnerable teens exposed to online risks.
In December, Australia became one of the first countries to introduce a nationwide ban on people aged under 16 accessing its major social media platforms. The move was hailed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as a success, with over 4.7 million accounts across the ten banned platforms being disabled or removed in the initial days following the ban's implementation.
Despite the progress made so far, Snapchat has acknowledged that its facial age estimation technology is not foolproof and can be easily bypassed by clever teenagers. The company claims to continue locking more accounts daily but admits there are "significant gaps" in the implementation of the ban that could undermine its effectiveness.
In practice, this means some young people under 16 may be able to circumvent protections and lose access to their accounts while others over 16 may incorrectly lose access. Additionally, teenagers are likely to turn to alternative messaging apps that escaped the ban, leaving them vulnerable to online exploitation.
Experts warn that policymakers need to reassess whether the law is achieving its intended outcomes and consider more effective measures to protect young people online. The eSafety commissioner has expressed concern over the deployment of facial age estimation technology without proper "liveness tests," which can lead to false positives.
As part of its efforts to comply with the ban, Snapchat has been trialing improved age assurance technologies. However, these initiatives are not yet widespread and more needs to be done to ensure the protection of vulnerable teens.
The eSafety commissioner's focus on the first 10 platforms has raised questions about the comprehensive nature of the ban. With some smaller companies having fewer than 100,000 users, concerns have been raised that these firms may not receive adequate attention from regulators.
Overall, while progress has been made in implementing the under-16s social media ban, there are significant gaps in protection that need to be addressed to ensure young people's online safety.
. I mean, how hard is it for a clever teen to find a way around it? It's like they say: if you want something badly enough, you'll figure out a way to get it 
. And what's with the 'liveness tests' not being done properly? That just sounds like a fancy excuse to me 
. I think policymakers need to take a closer look at this whole situation and think about more effective ways to keep our kids safe online. Maybe something that actually works instead of just throwing some tech at it 
.
. You'd think with so many attempts to implement these age restrictions, some real protection would've been put in place 
. It's just not good enough, especially when you know clever kids can outsmart the facial recognition tech 
. I mean, shouldn't we be doing more to keep our youth safe online? They're just too vulnerable to exploitation and manipulation 
. We need to go back to the drawing board and rethink this whole thing 
.
. If it's not foolproof, how can we trust it's keeping our teens safe? And these "liveness tests"... sounds like some fancy tech jargon to me 
.
. What about those smaller companies with fewer users? Are they gonna get the same love and attention as Snapchat? I don't think so 
.
.
It's like they're not taking it seriously enough. And what's up with the ban only covering 10 platforms? Shouldn't it be a bigger deal for all social media companies, regardless of size 
. Like, if they're not foolproof how can we trust them to keep our kids safe? 
. I mean, it's like, we thought this ban was gonna be a win but now it seems more like a lose-lose situation 
like what if they need it for school or something? and yeah facial age estimation tech is super unreliable can u imagine a 15 year old with a fake ID getting their account back 
. I'm totally with the experts who are saying that policymakers need to step up their game and find more effective ways to monitor online activity. The facial age estimation tech sounds sketchy 
415k aussie snapchat users under 16 had their accounts disabled already? thats a lot of teens left vulnerable online 
. I feel like policymakers need to do more research on how to protect these kids online, 'cause we can't just rely on tech alone 
, what's the point of even having a ban? They need to step up their game and get that facial age estimation tech spot on 
. We need better protection for our young people online, not just a slapdash solution 
. Snapchat thinks it can just disable a few accounts and call it a day? Meanwhile, they're still leaving the door open for all these dodgy under-16s who are gonna find ways to get around this new ban. And what about those smaller companies with like 100k users? Are they really getting the scrutiny they need from regulators? I don't think so 
shouldn't that tech be more reliable?!