Pureprofile says 78% of under-16s in Australia are still accessing social media platforms covered by the country's ban, while public support for the policy remains at 76%.
The study surveyed 1,025 parents, teachers and young Australians. It suggests enforcement has fallen heavily on families, with more than half of parents saying they have tried to uphold the restrictions at home.
Among those parents, 42% said enforcement was difficult. The figures point to a gap between political support for the ban and the practical challenge of keeping children off restricted services.
Enforcement burden
The research found that 41% of under-16s had tried to get around the ban, while 43% of parents said their children had attempted to do so. Older children appeared more likely to look for workarounds, with 46% of 13- to 15-year-olds reporting attempts to bypass the rules, compared with 37% of children aged eight to 12.
Parents reported a similar pattern. Nearly half, or 49%, of parents of 13- to 15-year-olds said their children had tried to evade the restrictions, compared with 41% of parents of eight- to 12-year-olds.
Age checks also appeared patchy. Only 31% of under-16s said they had gone through face-scanning age verification, and about half of those said they were able to pass as over 16.
This suggests the technical barriers meant to limit access are either not being applied consistently or are easy to defeat. As a result, parents rather than platforms are often left monitoring browser use, account sharing and sign-ups using false birth dates.
Martin Filz, chief executive officer of Pureprofile, said: "Six months post-ban, the findings suggest many of the concerns raised before the ban have materialised. While support for the policy remains strong, parents are under overwhelming pressure to enforce it - fighting to control a highly tech-savvy generation accessing platforms via browser instead of in-app, using their friends' accounts, signing up with fake birthdays and more. It's clear the ban's success or failure now rests firmly on what's happening at home, at least until enforcement technology catches up to the reality on the ground. As the report suggests, success is generally strongest where families have the capacity and digital fluency to take an approach that balances relationship, education, sensible oversight and empowerment."
Mixed effects
Although access to banned platforms remains widespread, many parents said the policy has changed how children spend their time. The study found that 77% of parents reported positive effects from the ban, up from 47% in the earlier wave of research.
Parents and children said more time was being spent on outdoor activities and offline interests, including reading, sport and creative hobbies. Some respondents also said children were spending more time gaming, watching television or viewing YouTube under supervision.
Filz said: "Even though the social media ban does require refining for a more consistent performance - as all new technology does - it's also encouraging to see families taking the opportunity to spend more time outdoors and offline. Some children undoubtedly miss online interactions with their friends, but many are also making full use of their extra time for in-person socialising with family and friends."
Shifting risks
The findings suggest that for some children, online activity has shifted rather than disappeared. Under-16s were switching to other digital services, including YouTube Kids and Discord, instead of leaving online spaces altogether.
The report also found that some banned platforms, including TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat, recorded increased usage among eight- to 12-year-olds in parent and child reporting. That points to uneven enforcement across age groups and platforms.
Exposure to harmful material remains a concern. Nearly 29% of 13- to 15-year-olds and 37% of eight- to 12-year-olds said they had seen violent or graphic content, while 35% of children aged eight to 15 reported exposure to bullying, harassment or hateful material.
Children also reported seeing sexual material, racist content and material linked to self-harm or eating disorders. Among parents who said their child had encountered inappropriate content, more than 80% said they were more likely to care about enforcing the ban.
The results build on earlier scepticism about whether the restrictions could be made effective in practice. In the previous wave of research, 68% of respondents said children would still be able to access social media despite the ban.
The latest figures show only a modest decline in access, with usage among under-16s falling to 78% from 84% in the earlier study. That suggests the policy may have changed behaviour at the margins while failing to prevent widespread use.
Filz said: "Other countries have been studying Australia's progress with the ban and have considered emulating it, and this data has good takeaways for them to refine their strategy. Ultimately, policy alone cannot determine success; it requires parental motivation and ability to effectively restrict harmful social media use."