So, we finally have numbers from Australia. And they’re significant.
The Australian government released official compliance data from the under-16 social media ban on Friday, and platforms removed access to 4.7 million accounts in the first two weeks of enforcement. That’s nearly double the entire youth population of the country.
If you’ve been watching this story to see whether enforcement is even possible at scale, here’s your answer. And if you’re weighing technology decisions for your own family, these numbers change the conversation about what’s actually achievable.
What Happened
eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant announced the figures at a press conference on Friday, 17 January. The data covers 4 December through 11 December, the week before the ban took effect and the day after.
All ten platforms reported on time:
- Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X, YouTube, Kick and Reddit
- 4.7 million accounts deactivated or restricted total
- All platforms deemed compliant
- No platform-by-platform breakdown provided by the government
Here’s why that 4.7 million figure is so large: Australia has approximately 2.5 million children aged 8-15. Previous research suggested 84% of 8-12 year-olds held social media accounts. The number exceeds the youth population because children hold multiple accounts. A child with Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube accounts gets counted three times.
Meta had already self-reported its numbers in a 12 January blog post. The company removed 544,052 accounts: 330,639 from Instagram, 173,497 from Facebook, and 39,916 from Threads. That’s roughly 11% of the total 4.7 million. We don’t know how the remaining 4.2 million accounts broke down across the other seven platforms because the government didn’t release that detail.
The announcement ended a weeks-long wait.
Why Australia Did This
This wasn’t a sudden decision. The ban came after years of pressure from parents who’d lost children to suicide following online bullying, extensive research documenting harm, and a growing sense that platforms weren’t doing enough to protect children.
South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas started the push after his wife asked him to read The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt. He commissioned former High Court Chief Justice Robert French to develop a proposal, resulting in a 267-page report. Other state and territory leaders backed the idea, and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made it federal policy.
The law requires platforms to take “reasonable steps” to prevent under-16s from holding accounts. It doesn’t prescribe specific verification methods. Companies that fail face fines up to A$49.5 million. Platforms can use government IDs, facial age estimation, or inferences from existing data (like how long an account has been held).
Denmark announced similar plans in November 2025, with legislation possible by mid-2026. France, Malaysia, and Indonesia have all said they’re following Australia’s lead. Several European nations and US states are having active conversations about it.
What This Means for Your Thinking
If your 13-year-old wants Instagram and you’ve been stalling or if you gave access to platforms at 12 or 13 and you’re questioning that decision: Australia’s approach creates a natural reset moment for thousands of families simultaneously. When an entire country shifts policy, individual families get cover to change course. That dynamic might not exist in your country, but the technical capability platforms demonstrated here shows that reversal is feasible when there’s will to do it. What will be interesting to follow is the research that will undoubtedly now be being carried out on the mental health of Australia’s youngest generation to see if there is an immediate positive trend in metrics.
If you’re watching this to see whether other countries follow: Denmark’s announcement matters more than you might think. Australia could be dismissed as an outlier bu when a Nordic country with different political structures reaches the same conclusion, it suggests something broader is shifting. Watch what European parliaments do over the next six months.
If you’re in Australia and your child’s accounts were removed: The government’s positioning this as success. Opposition politicians are claiming easy circumvention. The truth sits somewhere between those narratives. Some children will find workarounds. Many won’t. The enforcement question shifts now from “can platforms remove existing accounts?” to “can they prevent new account creation?” That’s much harder.
The Complications No One’s Talking About
The 4.7 million figure sounds definitive. It’s not.
eSafety Commissioner Grant acknowledged that some underage accounts remain active and it’s too early to declare full compliance. She used the speed limit analogy: “We don’t expect safety laws to eliminate every single breach. If we did, speed limits would have failed because people speed.”
VPN usage from Australia surged 170% on December 10, the day the ban took effect. That suggests a large portion of those “deactivated” users simply masked their location to regain access.
Grant noted a spike in downloads of alternative apps like Yope and Lemon8 when the ban was announced, but said usage didn’t sustain. She’s monitoring migration patterns, with the power to add platforms to the restricted list if they become popular with displaced users.
Opposition lawmakers claim the implementation has “fallen flat.” Communications Minister Anika Wells countered that the government “stared down everybody who said it couldn’t be done, some of the most powerful and rich companies in the world.” Both statements can be partially true.
The platform-by-platform breakdown matters. We know Meta’s numbers. We don’t know whether YouTube removed 2 million accounts or 200,000. That gap makes it hard to assess which platforms enforced aggressively versus minimally.
What to Watch Next
March 2026: Grant announced plans for “world-leading AI companion and chatbot restrictions” but provided no details. This suggests the regulatory scope is expanding beyond traditional social media.
April 13, 2026: The High Court holds a preliminary hearing for Reddit’s constitutional challenge. Reddit argues it’s a forum organised around topics, not a social network, and therefore shouldn’t be covered by the ban.
Late 2026: Full High Court hearing expected on both Reddit’s challenge and a separate case brought by the Digital Freedom Project on behalf of two 15-year-olds arguing the law violates implied freedom of political communication.
Denmark, mid-2026: Potential legislation for under-15 restrictions. If this passes, it’s the second developed democracy with comprehensive age restrictions.
Other jurisdictions: Malaysia’s ban took effect 1 January 2026. Norway plans mid-2026 implementation. Indonesia, France, Spain, Greece, and Romania all exploring similar measures.
Research will matter more than anyone’s currently discussing. Stanford University researchers are tracking mental health impacts over multiple years. Grant said it may take years for deeper cultural shifts to manifest in families and children. The 4.7 million accounts removed is a starting number, not an outcome.
When governments commission years of research and remove millions of accounts based on documented harm, the “everyone’s doing it” argument weakens considerably. Let’s see who moves next.
