Australian government defends social media ban for under 16s in court
Government lawyers argued that social media use posed several risks to children, including depression and anxiety.
The Australian government has defended its ban on social media use by children under the age of 16 in court, as it faces a legal challenge that could have global implications.
Government lawyers argued on Wednesday that social media use posed several risks to children, including depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation. They described the ban as “modest in extent” and argued that restrictions on freedom of political expression were “indirect”.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 items- list 1 of 3EU watchdog urges smart glasses to clearly signal when recording
- list 2 of 3Why social media has become an election issue in Brazil’s presidential race
- list 3 of 3Meta faces Australian lawsuit over alleged social media harm to children
The case has been brought by US social media platform Reddit and Sydney-based rights group Digital Freedom Project. They argue that the measure is disproportionate and infringes the implied freedom of political communication under the Australian Constitution.
The country’s highest court adjourned on Wednesday after a two-day hearing and is expected to deliver its verdict in the coming months.
Last year, Australia became the first country in the world to enforce a social media ban on children under the age of 16. The measure prompted several other countries, including France and the United Kingdom, to begin exploring similar restrictions.
A defeat for the Australian government could represent a setback for other countries seeking to follow its lead.
The Australian law bans children under the age of 16 from using several social media platforms, including Reddit, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube. Platforms risk being fined up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($34.7m) if they fail to take reasonable measures to remove children’s accounts.
Reddit argued on Wednesday that it should not have been included on the list of 10 age-restricted platforms and that the ban was “ill-targeted” and “over broad”.
The judges will now decide whether the benefits of the ban outweigh the restrictions on freedom of political expression.
According to government data published in July, five million social media accounts have been closed since the ban came into effect in December.
However, the government has conceded that many under-16s can still access social media by circumventing age-verification processes. It announced in June it was considering strengthening laws behind the ban, and is preparing an enforcement lawsuit.
Comments 0
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
World News
Explore All
Australian government defends social media ban for under 16s in court
Government lawyers argued that social media use posed risks to children, and action is needed to protect them.
Palestinians return to ruined Hebron homes after Israel’s 10-day siege
1 hour ago
Democrats deliver a historic routing to Republicans in US midterms
2 hours ago
Ecstatic scenes and historic results: Key moments from US midterms
2 hours agoDelhi air quality worsens ahead of Diwali as firework restrictions enter force
2 hours agoWhats New
View All
Democrats deliver a historic routing to Republicans in US midterms
Ecstatic scenes and historic results: Key moments from US midterms
Delhi air quality worsens ahead of Diwali as firework restrictions enter force
FIFA’s Infantino ineligible for re-election, says former governance chief
El-Sayed defeats Rogers to win Senate seat in Michigan
How America voted in maps and charts
Democrats win Congress: How they did it, and what it means
Spanish transport minister resigns after train crash killed 69 people
Four tankers destroyed by naval mines in Strait of Hormuz, Iran's IRGC says