Australian Social Media Ban for Under-16s Faces High Court Challenge
From December 10, Australian social networks must block under-16 accounts, a safety rule now facing a High Court challenge over free-speech concerns and youth access to information.
Australia's plan to limit access to social networks for users under 16 has triggered fierce debate as December 10 approaches. Advocates say the measure protects young people from harm online, while critics argue it unfairly censors youth voices. Two 15-year-olds have even taken the case to the High Court, claiming the policy violates free expression.
From 10 December, major platforms including Meta's Facebook and Instagram, TikTok and YouTube must block or remove accounts belonging to users under 16 in Australia. The aim is to reduce exposure to harmful content and the way algorithms may push risky material to younger users.
The Digital Freedom Project, a rights group, has filed the case in the High Court, backed by NSW politician John Ruddick. The plaintiffs are two 15-year-olds, Noah Jones and Macy Newland, who say the blanket ban infringes their right to communicate and access information online.
Noah Jones told INLIBER that while online dangers exist, a universal ban on under-16s is not the solution; platforms should prioritise removing predators and harmful content rather than protecting themselves from penalties.
Macy Newland acknowledged legitimate concerns about social media, gaming and screen time but also highlighted the positives, including education, communication and social inclusion. She argued for stronger safety features, age verification and better guidance on responsible use instead of a blanket ban.
The teenagers say the ban would disrupt friendships and limit access to political information they rely on for learning about current events.
Officials say the law is a necessary tool to protect children online. The Digital Freedom Project's action has faced opposition from tech firms, but public sentiment has shown broad support for stronger protections.
Communications Minister Anika Wells stated the government would not back down, arguing it acts in the interests of parents and children. She warned against allowing challenges or tech companies to derail child-safety efforts.
Polls show many Australian adults back the ban, though some mental health advocates warn it could isolate youths or push them toward less-regulated areas of the internet.
Expert view
Policy analyst Dr. Rachel Lee notes that blanket age bans can miss the underlying risks and may limit healthy online participation. She suggests targeted protections and robust digital literacy education as a more effective approach.
Summary
Supporters argue the ban provides clear safeguards for minors and a consistent regulatory stance. Opponents warn it could infringe on expression and hinder access to information. The High Court challenge will test whether blanket restrictions are the right tool for online safety in a connected age.
Key insight: A safer online environment for young people is built on targeted safety features and strong digital education, not universal age bans.
BBC News