Lawmakers across continents declare they want to shield children from harmful content and addictive algorithms. They push forward with social media restrictions aimed at those under 16 or even 15. Yet these efforts quietly demand something far broader. Every user may soon need to prove their age just to scroll.
France became the latest nation to act. Its parliament approved a ban on social media for children under 15 this week. The measure requires platforms to implement age verification systems. New accounts for minors get blocked starting in September. Existing ones face removal by early 2027. Officials point to mental health concerns, reduced screen time, and fights against online bullying as primary drivers. President Emmanuel Macron backed the legislation strongly.
But the details reveal trade-offs. Reliable methods often involve ID scans or facial recognition. Those protect against evasion yet expose adults to privacy risks. Less intrusive options like behavioral inference prove easy to fool. Kids in other countries already bypass them with makeup or minor appearance tweaks.
Australia set the precedent. It banned social media for under-16s in December 2025. Six months later more than 60 percent of 12- to 15-year-olds who previously held accounts still access at least one platform. The Fortune article from July 21 details how regulators barred demands for government ID. Even so enforcement falters. One mother discovered her son drawing a mustache with an eyebrow pencil to pass facial scans.
David Inserra follows these developments closely. A fellow for free expression and technology at the Cato Institute and member of TikTok’s US Content Advisory Council he told Fortune that each law starts narrow. “It’s not just about verifying the age of kids. To verify the age of kids you have to verify the age of everyone and that means everyone’s ID.” Platforms cannot target only suspected minors. They must check all users first.
That shift turns child protection into an identity requirement. Adults lose anonymity online. And the push spreads. The UK’s communications regulator Ofcom opened an investigation into TikTok on July 16. It questions whether the platform’s age-inference model misses too many underage users. Regulators there signal preference for “highly effective” methods. Translation often points toward biometrics or documents.
VPN usage surged in Britain after passage of the Online Safety Act. The House of Lords responded with votes to force VPN providers to run age checks too. Tools designed for privacy and security now fall under scrutiny. Journalists remote workers and everyday citizens face new barriers. Inserra sees escalation as predictable. “When these laws these policies fail to live up to the hype that they promise because people can get around them these regulators will crack down. It’s what we’re seeing in the UK and it’s starting in Australia. I think it’s only a matter of time.”
Indonesia joined the trend earlier. It banned social media for children under 16 on March 28 2026 according to Wikipedia’s compilation of online age verification laws by country. Canada introduced Bill C-34 the Safe Social Media Act on June 10. Culture Minister Marc Miller sponsored it. The bill would prohibit accounts for those under 16.
US states experiment too. Ohio’s age verification law for social media and websites targeting under-16s survived a federal appeals court challenge in June. A panel of judges in Cincinnati upheld the 2024 statute ending a prior block. At least 20 states have passed related measures on access addictive feeds or age-appropriate design though courts split on enforcement. Nebraska’s Parental Rights in Social Media Act takes effect in phases with penalties from July 1. It demands age verification and parental consent for minors.
Hawaii’s SB 2761 passed the senate in March by a 22-3 vote along party lines. Wisconsin’s governor vetoed a similar bill in April citing privacy violations. The Electronic Frontier Foundation raised alarms about the federal KIDS Act in a June 24 analysis. It warns the package pressures platforms to verify ages for all users. Provisions extend beyond children to affect teens and create rules for private communications. “Buried inside the KIDS Act are provisions that will push online services to verify all users’ ages require government-directed moderation policies for online speech and even create new rules about private and encrypted communications.”
Critics highlight workarounds. Teens switch to newer unregulated apps or borrow family accounts. Fake IDs circulate. Support for bans drops when details emerge. Polling in New Zealand showed 64 to 75 percent back an under-16 restriction in principle. Yet questions about ID checks surveillance and restricted access cause that approval to collapse. A barrister quoted on X described the falloff as steep.
Tech companies push back. They face the age verification trap. Biometric collection becomes a compliance cost. Privacy objections slowed similar bills in Congress including the Kids Online Safety Act. The Supreme Court precedent on anonymous speech offers hope for American resistance. Inserra believes US courts will reject national ID mandates for online activity.
Elsewhere momentum builds. Tech Policy Press tracked global efforts in February. It noted Australia’s ban inspired proposals in Europe Asia and the US. Industry lobbies against them. Constitutional questions linger. Free expression concerns multiply. Yet public anxiety over youth mental health supplies political fuel.
France’s second attempt follows a 2023 law that never gained traction. This version aims for school-year rollout. Reports already surface the same tensions seen down under. ID scans risk sibling sharing. Facial estimates invite evasion. VPNs offer escape routes. The pattern repeats.
So what comes next. Regulators may tighten rules on circumvention tools. Platforms could adopt unified standards under pressure. Or backlash might grow as adults confront mandatory checks. The initial goal stays clear. Protect young users from documented harms. The method chosen carries consequences that stretch well beyond any single age group. And those consequences arrive faster than many anticipated.
Recent X discussions reflect the debate. Users debate whether France truly banned social media for under-15s or simply mandated universal proof of adulthood. One post stressed the difference. “They make EVERYONE else prove they are NOT under 15. Also known as ID and age verification checks. Which is a slippery slope to full on digital ID and mass surveillance.” Another highlighted enforcement timelines. Platforms get four months to close existing underage accounts.
Harvard Law Review examined these laws in February. It discussed intermediate scrutiny under the First Amendment. At least 16 states had enacted regulations by late 2025. Most district courts struck them down on speech grounds. Justice Kavanaugh once called a Mississippi version likely unconstitutional in a concurrence. The legal fights continue.
Implementation varies. Some nations bar data collection from under-13s. Others focus on app stores. Texas passed an App Store Accountability Act. It forces age checks before downloads or purchases. Georgia requires parental consent for under-16s on social platforms effective last year.
The Fortune piece captures the core tension. Officials sell narrow fixes. Reality demands systemic change. Everyone shows papers. Privacy erodes. Effectiveness remains uncertain. Kids adapt quickly. Regulators respond with broader rules. The cycle accelerates.
Whether this approach truly safeguards youth or merely builds surveillance architecture stays open to question. Data on outcomes trickles in slowly. Australia offers the longest test case. Results so far disappoint proponents. Yet the political will persists. More nations study the model. More states draft bills. The ID trap widens. And ordinary internet users step into it one verification at a time.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication