Reddit launches high court challenge to Australia’s under-16s social media ban | Social media ban

Reddit has challenged Australia’s social media ban on under-16s in the high court, presenting its case two days after it imposed age restrictions on its website.

The company said in a post on Reddit on Friday that while it agreed that people under 16 should be protected, the law “has the unfortunate effect of forcing intrusive and potentially unsafe verification processes on minors as well as adults, isolating young people from the ability to participate in age-appropriate community experiences.”

Reddit said there was “unreasonable patchwork” on the platforms included in the ban.

“As the Australian Human Rights Commission has stated, ‘Less restrictive alternatives are available that can achieve the aim of protecting children and young people from online harm, but without causing such a significant adverse impact on other human rights.’”

Reddit argued that it was a primarily adult forum without traditional social media features that the government was “taking issue with.”

Reddit was challenging the law on the grounds that it violated the implied freedom of political communication. He was also trying to challenge whether Reddit could be considered an age-restricted social media platform under the legislation.

He said he did not intend to challenge the law to avoid compliance and had introduced age protection measures since Wednesday.

The company said the vast majority of Reddit users are adults and the ads do not target children under 18. The Apple app store age limit for Reddit is 17+.

“Despite the best intentions, this law misses the mark when it comes to truly protecting young people online,” Reddit said. “So while we will comply with this law, we have a responsibility to share our point of view and have it reviewed by the courts.”

Reddit’s challenge is separate to one presented by New South Wales Libertarian MP John Ruddick’s Digital Freedom Project group. The Digital Freedom Project group’s next hearing will be in late February, and Reddit expects the hearing to be held next year if the high court takes up the case.

Professor Sarah Joseph, of Griffith University’s School of Law, said she believed there was strong evidence against the ban.

“I believe the law cuts off the main source of political information for people under the age of 16 in terms of receiving and giving information. Although that is not the intent of the law, it is one of its many effects,” he said.

“While other sources remain open, they operate in very different ways and do not provide the same tools for communicating one’s views and the same diversity of views.”

But Joseph said he believed the high court case was more likely to fail, as are most challenges to the legislation on implied freedom of communication grounds.

“In most cases, freedom is at stake, but the high court continues to find the law proportionate. In reality, constitutional freedom is quite weak because of the way it is interpreted and applied.”

Constitutional law professor Luke Beck wrote in the Guardian on Thursday that a law that had the effect of reducing the overall volume of political communication in Australia would be invalid unless it was proportionate to a legitimate aim.

“[But] The Monash University academic said the social media account ban had only slightly reduced the overall volume of political communication in Australia.

“The law does not prohibit teenagers from using the internet or having group chats online. Presumably [Ruddick] social media account case… the government will succeed.”

The Guardian revealed on Tuesday that Reddit argued with the eSafety commissioner in September that it should be exempt from the ban.

“The sole or significant purpose of our platform is to enable the sharing of information in timely, context-rich conversations; interaction between end users is only an incidental step in achieving this primary purpose,” Reddit said in the letter, obtained under freedom of information laws.

“It is not in line with Reddit norms for users to use their real names or identities on Reddit because communities are not built around real-time social networks among young people.”

The company said Reddit does not support real-time presence, friend requests or activity broadcasts that drive constant engagement. It said it was committed to collecting a minimum of personal information from users to protect the pseudonymity on the platform.

Reddit is “a pseudonymous platform organized around sharing information in topic-based communities rather than personal profiles or social networks,” the platform said.

All 10 platforms that the government announced fell within the scope of the ban (Twitch, Kick, YouTube, Threads, Facebook, Instagram, Snap, X, TikTok and Reddit) had all taken the necessary measures to comply by Wednesday.