Meta has been employing digital influencers in an attempt to mitigate the impact of legislation aimed at limiting or prohibiting teenagers' access to social media. According to The Guardian, this strategy involves collaboration with content creators focused on topics such as mental health, lifestyle, and parenting. These influencers are invited to events and, on certain occasions, receive financial compensation to promote the safety features provided by Instagram.
This campaign gained momentum as various global governments began discussions about defining age limits for using these platforms. Australia stood out in this scenario, having enacted the world's first law banning minors under 16 from using social media in November 2024, making it a central point in the company's tactic.
Safety Promotion Event in Australia
In July 2025, five months before the Australian law came into effect, Meta organized a gathering for parenting-focused influencers near Sydney Bay, overlooking the Sydney Opera House. The event was decorated to simulate camps, including tents and personalized materials branded with Instagram, alongside activities for participants.
The specific purpose of this meeting, called the 'Instagram Safety Camp,' was to persuade influencers to advocate the thesis that banning teenagers from using social media is not the best way to ensure their protection.
A report issued by the Tech Transparency Project (TTP), an organization dedicated to monitoring the technology sector, points out that Meta has been recruiting influencers since 2024 to promote its safety tools for young people. This approach reportedly intensified whenever a government began debating new regulatory standards for younger users.
Safety Features and Partnerships
Among the features presented are Instagram Teen Accounts, designed for users between 13 and 17 years old and configured with extra protections. These accounts restrict who can message teenagers, limit access to certain types of content, and incorporate monitoring functionalities for guardians.
Some of the influencers hired by Meta received sponsorship to publish material about these tools. However, the company states that it does not disclose the contractual details of its collaborations.
Katie Paul, director of the Tech Transparency Project, observed that the use of influencers indicates that Meta recognized its limitations in convincing the public on its own. Paul told The Guardian that 'the brand has become a problem,' arguing that the corporation needs to resort to individuals who already enjoy the trust of their followers to convey its message.
In Australia, actress Tammin Sursok, known for her role in the series 'Pretty Little Liars' and for producing content on parenting, attended the Meta event and shared a message praising Instagram's safety instruments. Her post mentioned features such as parental supervision, defense against explicit images, and restrictions on live streams, using the hashtag #instagrampartner to signal a paid partnership with the company.
Meta also collaborated with entities that receive financial support from the company to endorse its position against broad bans. ReachOut Australia, an organization focused on youth mental health, was present at one of the Australian event panels and subsequently shared information about the gathering, listing Meta as a 'gold' level sponsor. As part of this collaboration, Meta funded an online series on teen safety detailing the Instagram Teen Accounts.
ReachOut emphasized that it maintains editorial autonomy and that no partner, including Meta, reviews or approves the content published by the organization or its representatives. In turn, Meta stated that it has maintained a partnership with the entity for almost ten years, in campaigns aimed at informing users about available safety features.
One of the influencers, Imperfect Mom Who Travels, with approximately 250 thousand followers, posted a video showing her son creating a teen account on Instagram. The video description stated that it was positive to see the accounts offering 'integrated protections designed for age-appropriate experiences from day one,' and included an advertisement disclosure.
In the same week, a researcher from the Observer Research Foundation, an institute based in New Delhi (India), published an article arguing the ineffectiveness of social media bans for teenagers. This organization received funding from Facebook India in 2022 and currently considers Meta among its partners. Meta denied paying the researcher or the organization for the article's publication, and the Observer Research Foundation did not respond to comments requests made by The Guardian.
Internal Criticisms of the Marketing Strategy
Arturo Bejar, a former Meta employee who became a whistleblower after working in security at the company, criticized the methodology of using influencers to promote Teen Accounts. According to him, this campaign creates a perception of security greater than what the features actually provide.
Bejar alleged: 'You can still search for content about suicide and self-harm, even though they promise it is not possible.' He added: 'It is possible to search for content about eating disorders, and it is the search recommendations themselves that bypass its safety features.' For the former employee, the strategy demonstrates more concern from Meta about preserving its image than about solving the safety challenges faced by young people.
He concluded: 'It is wrong that they are using the platform itself to advertise and, at the same time, resorting to creators who benefit from the platform. There are conflicts of interest at all levels to create a false and dangerous impression of safety and protection for young people.' Meta countered, stating that Bejar's experience with Instagram's safety features occurred before the implementation of Teen Accounts.
This debate takes place in a global context where governments are seeking methods to reduce the risks associated with teenagers using social media. Australia implemented its legislation in December 2025, requiring platforms to prevent minors under 16 from creating or maintaining profiles. Since then, Meta has reported removing 756,000 suspicious accounts belonging to Australian users under 16, with about 462,000 from Instagram and 294,000 from Facebook.
However, data from the Australian regulatory body indicated that over 80% of teenagers continued to use social media three months after the ban, and many did not need to state their age to access the platforms. These figures illustrate a primary difficulty of age restriction policies: preventing teenagers from simply creating new accounts, providing incorrect data, or finding ways to circumvent verification systems.
Andrew Leigh, Australian Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury, defended the legislation, stating: 'We never expected 100% compliance.' He justified that minimum age laws for other activities are also not fully respected, but this does not imply they should be abolished.
The movement has gained relevance in other markets crucial to Meta. In Indonesia, the government established a general ban for teenagers in March 2026. In India, some states have already implemented restrictions while the country discusses national regulation. In Brazil, the Statute of the Child and Adolescent (ECA), approved in March 2026, instituted rigorous age verification mechanisms and the linking of children's accounts to parents.
According to the Tech Transparency Project, Meta launched variations of its influencer campaign in all these markets. The company maintains that generalized bans do not represent the ideal solution. In response to the report, Edward Patterson, Meta spokesperson, declared that the company is working to develop 'robust protections for teenagers and efficient controls for parents.'
Patterson argued: 'Broad bans do not keep young people safe; they simply push them into less safe and unregulated areas of the internet.' He cited Australia itself as an example, explaining that 16 and 17-year-olds can still use the services, but they are automatically placed in Teen Accounts. Meta assures that it will continue collaborating with parents and experts to disseminate its safety resources.
Experts have yet to reach a consensus on the best way to protect children and adolescents from the risks of social media, with uncertainties regarding both the effectiveness of bans and the governmental capacity to enforce them. In the United States and the United Kingdom, groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Fight for the Future, which historically criticize Meta's privacy practices, also question certain age restriction proposals. David Greene, senior lawyer at the EFF, argues that government intervention should be a last resort, proposing alternatives such as native parental control tools within the platforms themselves.
For Katie Paul, however, Meta has already demonstrated the capacity to adequately protect young users on its own. She stated: 'Facebook and its sister platforms have existed for 20 years, and the company has proven it cannot be trusted to self-regulate.' She concluded: 'Therefore, what we are seeing is that governments are resorting to the last resort and saying: 'If children cannot be protected on these platforms, we will have to do it ourselves.'
