The World's First Age Restriction on Social Media with Zero Transparency: The Reality of the Trial Experts Have Abandoned in Australia

Australia, which advocates the "world's first complete ban on social media for those under 16," faces a pivotal moment with a 6 million AUD technology trial that could determine its success or failure. The leading critic has finally stepped down from the board. The person who resigned is Tim Levy, head of the children's online safety company Qoria. Is the trial, which the government touts as a "success," really functioning? By incorporating voices from the field and the frenzy on social media, we delve into the core of the policy.crikey.com.au

1. Overview of the Teenage Social Media Ban Law and Technology Trial

In November 2024, the Albanese administration passed an amended online safety law that "prohibits social media use for those under 16, and operating companies must take reasonable measures or face fines of up to 49.5 million AUD." The Age Assurance Technology Trial led by the UK's Age Check Certification Scheme (ACCS) was chosen as the technical basis. In a field test involving over 1,000 students, more than 60 types of evaluations, including facial recognition and ID scans, were conducted. The interim report on June 20 concluded that "there are no significant technical barriers."reuters.comreuters.com

2. Levy's Resignation—"No Disclosure of Statistics or Procedures"

However, on June 23, Tim Levy of Qoria resigned from the advisory committee. The reason was that "the trial has degenerated into a showcase to justify the policy." According to Levy, Qoria's parental control software was submitted but never tested, and the report was a "policy document devoid of numbers." He further criticized that "despite pointing out a high error rate and bypass potential, an optimistic conclusion was presented."crikey.com.au

3. Three Technical Issues with the Trial

1. Accuracy Barrier
   According to The Guardian, even at the highest accuracy, there was an error margin of about "±18 months," with cases where a 15-year-old was judged to be in their 20s.theguardian.com

2. Privacy and Excessive Data Collection
   The method of combining facial images, IDs, and biometric information poses a "risk of unnecessary personal data accumulation," as acknowledged by the trial side itself.reuters.com

3. Bypass Resistance
   Levy pointed out the issue that bypassing through VPNs or family proxy photos was "not subject to the trial." On social media, teens themselves mockingly post that they "just need to log in with their brother's face."crikey.com.au

4. Politics and Information Disclosure—The Enigma of "Segmented Disclosure"

Trial leader Tony Allen explained that "details will be in the final report at the end of July," while reducing the interim report to "12 headlines." There are also claims that the media distribution time was moved forward to shape public opinion with preemptive reports from government-aligned papers. Some advisory committee members express distrust, calling it "piecemeal disclosure akin to movie marketing."crikey.com.au

5. Pros and Cons on Social Media

The hashtags #TeenBanAU and #AgeAssurance saw over 15,000 posts on the day of the interim report, highlighting a clear polarization between "political tokenism" and "a step to protect children."

6. Protecting Children or Excluding Them?

Child psychologists are concerned that "simply blocking social media will widen isolation and information gaps." On the other hand, conservative lawmakers argue that "the state should build a wall rather than leaving it to Meta or TikTok," with the ruling and opposition parties "unusually" aligning. However, with only six months left until implementation, if the technical requirements and guidelines are not solidified, chaos is inevitable.reuters.com

7. Future Timeline

• End of July: ACCS to submit the final report

• Mid-August: Government plans public release (delays possible)

• December 1: Law comes into effect, platforms begin "reasonable measures" obligation

• 2026: First case of sanctions for violations expected

The implementation phase, where technology, law, and teen ingenuity intersect, remains uncertain, and the international community is watching closely.

8. Conclusion—"Whose Safety Measure Is It?"

The departure of experts is not merely a personnel issue but a mirror reflecting a crisis in the policy-making process. Without transparency, the government's "world's first" could end up as an empty slogan. To truly protect children, it is essential to face the limitations of technology and adopt a "comprehensive approach" that combines social education, parental support, and corporate responsibility—this is the biggest lesson from the current turmoil.