The Australian government has admitted that its "world-leading" ban on social media for under-16s was implemented before a scientific consensus was reached on the link between mental health harms and social media use. Despite this, the government argues that "credible risks" such as addictive behaviours and anxiety justify the policy.
This defence comes as the government faces a high court challenge to the ban. It also suggested that its proposed digital duty of care legislation, which would allow users to opt out of social media features like algorithms, would ultimately achieve the same effect as the ban.
US-based platform Reddit is challenging the ban, arguing it burdens the implied freedom of political communications and does not adequately address harm risks. Reddit's submission noted the exclusion of some platforms from the ban and the continued availability of targeted design features to users without accounts. Reddit also highlighted the reported number of under-16s who have maintained or registered new accounts since the ban began in December last year.
In its defence, filed on Friday, the Australian government stated that "significant credible risks" exist for children developing addictive behaviours, disrupted sleep, and worsening depression, anxiety, suicidal behaviours or ideation. The government's submission asserted that "uncertainty about causation should not delay action to protect young people."
The government claims the ban has already resulted in "substantial practical action," citing the removal of nearly 5 million accounts in December last year, with Reddit itself suspending 43,962 accounts between December and March this year. The eSafety commissioner's powers have been boosted, and fines for non-compliance have been doubled to nearly $100 million.