● Covered by 1 source · 1 reportMedium impact1 negative
Report Supporting Australia's Teen Social Media Ban Contains AI-Generated Citation Errors
Key points
- Report for Australia's social media ban contains citation errors.
- ACCS admitted using ChatGPT for editing, denied AI for citations.
- Guardian Australia identified six references with errors.
- Errors include non-existent DOIs and mismatched author/journal data.
Citation Errors Found in Age Assurance Report
A report commissioned to test age assurance technology for Australia's under-16 social media ban has been found to contain significant citation errors. The trial, conducted by the UK-based Age Check Certification Scheme (ACCS) and costing $3.48 million, was cited by Communications Minister Anika Wells as evidence for the ban.
A Senate inquiry received a submission highlighting at least two citation errors, suggesting they were "AI hallucinated." Guardian Australia's analysis identified six references in the report's "emerging technologies" chapter with errors.
ACCS Admits AI Use for Editing, Denies for Citations
ACCS initially denied using AI in the report's generation but later conceded that ChatGPT was used to rewrite paragraphs for conciseness. They maintained that all cited materials were checked as genuine and relevant.
However, the identified errors include Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) linking to non-existent or incorrect papers, and author, journal, and publication year combinations that do not match known references. Some DOI links also led to papers that did not support the report's claims.
Further Errors in ACCS Clarifications
When asked for clarification, ACCS provided new references, but these also contained errors. A list of journal articles intended to correct the original citations included years, authors, and journal titles that did not match the initial report.
One article cited by ACCS was reportedly accessed in March 2025, indicating a future date.
Implications for Social Media Ban Legislation
The discovery of these errors raises questions about the reliability of the evidence used to support Australia's under-16 social media ban. The report was presented as a key justification for the ban, which came into effect in December last year. The ongoing Senate inquiry is examining ways to strengthen the social media ban law.
✨ This summary was generated by AI from the outlets' reporting listed below. It is not independently verified and may contain errors — check the original sources. How BrevFeed works →
The daily brief
One email each morning: the day's tech stories, clustered across outlets and summarized. No account needed.
One email a day. Unsubscribe in one click, any time.
Today's brief
Spend a few minutes, get the whole day. Every topic's top stories in one hands-free rundown — listen, watch, or read the transcript.
▶ Play today's brief
New every morning, and the back catalogue is archived by date.
Reporting from
A report used to justify Australia's under-16 social media ban, which cost $3.48 million, has been found to contain multiple citation errors, some of which appear to be AI hallucinations. The UK-based Age Check Certification Scheme (ACCS), which conducted the trial, admitted to using ChatGPT for editing but denied AI generated the citations. This raises concerns about the reliability of the evidence supporting the social media ban.