Reel-ing it in: Meta is paying influencers to promote teen accounts
Meta has been recruiting and paying parenting, lifestyle and mental health influencers to promote its teen safety tools whenever governments consider tighter regulation of children's social media use, according to a report by the Tech Transparency Project. The advocacy group's findings suggest the pattern emerged as a coordinated strategy: rather than lobbying directly against restrictions, Meta enlists trusted online voices to argue that outright bans are ineffective and that its existing parental controls already keep teenagers safe, a tactic seen most recently in Australia.
The report highlights a July 2025 event in Sydney, where Meta gathered Australian parenting influencers at an Instagram-branded gathering just months before the country's ban on under-16s using social media took effect in December 2025. Since 2024, Meta has used such events and sponsored posts to encourage creators with large followings to publicise its Teen Accounts, which impose extra restrictions on 13- to 17-year-olds, while also funding parent and research groups that oppose blanket bans. Tech Transparency Project director Katie Paul said the approach reflects public distrust of Meta itself, while the company said blanket bans push young people towards "less safe, unregulated corners of the internet" and stressed its commitment to parental safety features.
- Meta pays influencers to promote teen safety tools amid regulation threats
- Report ties tactic to Australia's under-16 social media ban
- Meta says bans are ineffective; critics cite public distrust of the firm
New here? Start with this
Meta owns Instagram and Facebook, two of the social media services used by teenagers. Its Teen Accounts add restrictions for users aged 13 to 17, while parental controls let families manage some aspects of how young people use the services.
Governments have been considering limits on children’s access to social media, including Australia, where a ban for under-16s took effect in December 2025. The debate is about how best to protect young people online, and whether age-based bans or safety tools within social media services are more effective.
The Tech Transparency Project, an advocacy group, says Meta has paid parenting, lifestyle and mental health influencers to promote its safety tools when tighter rules are under discussion. Meta says blanket bans could push young people towards less regulated parts of the internet; the report’s findings have drawn attention to the role of sponsored voices in that debate.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Meta's strategy of engaging paid influencers to shape public discourse around regulatory proposals raises legitimate concerns about transparency and motivation. By mobilising trusted parenting voices rather than engaging openly as a company with commercial interests, Meta obscures the financial relationship whilst leveraging these creators' credibility to discourage legislative action. This approach is particularly problematic given Meta's fundamental business model depends on user engagement and advertising revenue from teen users, creating an inherent conflict of interest when the company funds opposition to regulations designed to protect those same teenagers.
The case against
Meta's position that blanket bans on teen social media are counterproductive may be genuinely correct, regardless of who advances it. Graduated restrictions through parental controls and age-appropriate features could plausibly offer more nuanced protection than prohibition, which might simply drive teenagers to less regulated platforms with fewer safeguards. Engaging with influencers and funding research groups to communicate this perspective is legitimate public advocacy; corporations are entitled to participate in policy debates about matters affecting their business, and having financial interest in an issue does not automatically invalidate one's arguments about what policies would actually keep teenagers safer.