Kids are outsmarting social media bans. That’s not a problem we need to solve.

Since the implementation of social media bans targeting minors, it has become apparent that teenagers are adept at circumventing these restrictions. A study published earlier this year revealed that the majority of teens under 16 found a way to access prohibited platforms. To bypass these bans, minors have utilized various methods such as using a sibling's identification for verification or fabricating facial hair.

While some argue for stricter enforcement measures to counter these workarounds, the reality is that circumvention serves as a clear indication of the limitations of these bans. Age restrictions on social media inadvertently limit children's access to crucial information necessary for their development, identity formation, and socialization during adolescence.

Implementing stricter age gates can backfire, as attempting to close loopholes in age gates may potentially lead to more harm than good. By pushing children towards less moderated and higher-risk corners of the internet, these restrictions also compromise privacy and security for everyone involved. Parents and children alike advocate for smarter, more nuanced policies that strike a balance between protecting children and preserving their rights.

Age gates alone cannot achieve the desired outcome nor simplify the challenges faced by parents in the digital landscape. At best, they exacerbate existing issues and postpone the conversation to a later stage. At worst, they leave children without guidance as they navigate the online world. Rather than safeguarding youth, bans create a less secure internet environment.

When young people circumvent restrictions, they are often expressing the behaviors we encourage in other contexts - curiosity, problem-solving, and independence. This online behavior is often a natural part of developing social skills and identity. Bans fail to consider young people's needs and the realities of their online activities, adopting a paternalistic stance that disregards their perspectives.

Additionally, many parents support their children in deceiving social media companies to gain access to necessary but restricted services. This is not a new issue; studies dating back to 2011 have shown that parents have taught their children how to circumvent Facebook's age restrictions. While some may argue that these parents are unaware of the risks or uncaring, parental motivations vary.

Many parents genuinely believe that the benefits outweigh the risks, as offering their children responsible access to social media provides opportunities for connecting with peers, discovering information, and acquiring digital safety skills. When parents fail to assist children in accessing desired platforms, they may inadvertently navigate to alternative, less supervised spaces, some of which can pose more significant dangers.

The Australian social media ban has shown that screen time has not significantly decreased and, in some cases, has been redirected towards unmonitored and unknown platforms. As cities become less vibrant when empty, the most hazardous platforms for young individuals are those with minimal supervision. While age gates come with their own dangers, such as automated tracking of user activities to verify age, companies may request personal documents to confirm age, increasing the risk of data mishandling or identity theft.

The compromised Discord service exposed 70,000 users' government IDs, highlighting the potential misuse of personal information. Efforts to hinder minors from bypassing age gates have led to a crackdown on VPN usage, which can negatively impact privacy-focused tools' purpose.