Experiments in Futility: Australia’s Teenage Social Media Ban Approaches
The messiness of Australia’s social media ban for those under 16 as part of the Online Safety Act 2021 is becoming more apparent by the day. From December 10 this year, as announced by the commissar-minded eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, “age-restricted social media platforms will have to take reasonable steps to prevent Australians under the age of 16 from creating or keeping an account.” This, she declares, is “not a ban” but “a delay to having accounts.” Last month, the office formed the opinion “that Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X, YouTube, Kick and Reddit are age-restricted platforms.”
Showing a willingness to adapt to, if not outflank the regulations with gusto, curious teenagers are finding other platforms to indulge in. This has precipitated much fuss by the eSafety office to make sure that these discovered outlets are also brought within the scope of the ban. Lemon8, owned by TikTok parent company ByteDance, and the photo sharing app, Yope, have recently piqued the regulator’s interest. This promises to be a perennially futile exercise.
Cyber Safety Solutions founder Susan McLean is clearly on firm ground in dismissing the restrictions as moribund before they even come into effect. “For every single bad thing that has been caused by a banned social media platform,” she attests to the Australian Financial Review, “I can provide you with a platform that is not going to be banned where the same thing has happened.”
McLean also points to another crippling problem: that the age restricting measures can themselves be circumvented on designated platforms. “I’ve seen people scrunch up their face to look older, do full face and make-up tutorials. There are masks you can buy, making your face a darker colour, which apparently makes it harder to tell your age. God knows what’s true and what’s not.”
Then come the qualifications and exemptions that make such a regulation increasingly foolish even before it comes into effect. The commissioner seems of the view that children visiting Australia must have different standards of maturity altogether. They will be exempt from the social media ban when visiting the country, able to lord this fact over any friends of similar age they might make locally. The locals are to be kept childishly pure and incorruptible.
The Digital Freedom Project (DFP) is keen to pursue the legality of the measure in the Australian High Court. The claim is that the laws are disproportionate and breach the constitutional right of freedom of political communication, a right divined by the High Court in a constitution that lacks any express mention of it. While accepting the principle that children need protection from online harms, the DFP asserts that “a measure is only constitutional if, in substance, it burdens political communication no more than is reasonably necessary to achieve that purpose.”
Two 15-year-olds, Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, are named as plaintiffs in the action. “We’re disappointed,” stated Jones, “in a lazy government that blanket bans under-16s rather than investing in programs to help kids be safe on social media.” Neyland, in a waspish mood, feels that, “If you personally think that kids shouldn’t be on social media, stay off it yourself, but don’t impose it on me and my peers.”
The Digital Freedom Project president John Ruddick, a Libertarian member of the New South Wales upper house, further added that the ban shifted the burden of parental responsibility to “unelected bureaucrats” and government apparatchiks. This valid assertion has done little to disabuse the Albanese government of this daft enterprise. “Despite the fact that we are receiving threats and legal challenges by people with ulterior motives,” snorted the Communications Minister Anika Wells in parliament, “the Albanese Labor government remains steadfastly on the side of parents, and not platforms.”
Of interest is whether this implied right extends to those under the age of 16. The implied right, unlike the free speech protections in the United States, is not personally vested in individuals. This legal misnomer acts, rather, as a fetter on excessive parliamentary interference upon discussions and engagements in political communication. Former High Court Chief Justice Robert French, when assessing a South Australian law of similar design, opined that the restriction on content remains “neutral” and “not directed at political speech” even if it might cover it. The stock approach of judges in Australia is to show reluctance in striking down parliament’s will, however mischievous and foolish, as long as the means of doing so are “reasonable and proportionate” for “a legitimate purpose consistent with Australia’s representative democracy.”
This government, much like its predecessors, has insisted on mandatory infantilisation as a principle of public policy. In doing so, it has shown a pathological mistrust not only of children’s intellectual fibre, but the capacity of parents to front up to their nurturing tasks in a digital world. The legislation has left many citizens with the false impression that harms will be redressed in a cogent way, when there is every likelihood that the appetite for social media will remain undiminished. The very idea that children might be enlightened in their use of technology will not feature, while their sheltered ignorance will be treasured.
Iraq warns over rising digital threats to children as internet use surges among young users
.jpeg)
Iraq's government has again stumbled into the argument over the use of digital platforms as it continues to turn the screw on social media, games and virtual platforms.
The Iraqi Strategic Centre for Human Rights said that the combination of “wide-scale internet use” and the “absence of continuously updated safety measures” within households and institutions has created an increasingly unsafe digital environment for minors.
The Baghdad-based centre warned that global data paints a disturbing picture of the amount of time spent on screens, which Iraqi households have struggled to deal with in recent years. Historically, Arab governments have not engaged in such debates, but calls from some families about the use of specific platforms and games have raised concerns across different communities.
According to UNICEF data, when a child goes online, every half second shows just how quickly young users are being swept into a digital space where predators, extortion and manipulation are widespread risks. It cited recent studies indicating that more than 300mn children worldwide face digital threats annually, ranging from online sexual exploitation and extortion to cyberbullying and coercive digital behaviour.
Concerns have deepened since the government announced in October 2025 a ban on electronic games such as PUBG, Fortnite and Roblox, arguing they encourage violence and undermine childhood well-being.
The Ministry of Interior said the games had become “a threat to social security” and “a waste of children’s and adolescents’ money and time”. The move is part of a broader campaign to curb products seen as harmful to young people, following the earlier ban on the Labubu doll.
The backdrop is a steadily tightening digital landscape. In 2024, Iraq expanded its internet restrictions, blocking several major websites, including the Internet Archive and 4chan.
A Ministry of Communications report that same year found that 62% of Iraqi households do not activate any form of parental control on children’s devices, leaving young users significantly more exposed to online risks.
The Strategic Centre drew attention to the most common threats to Iraqi children, including cyberbullying and its psychological impact, online luring and exploitation, theft of personal data due to weak privacy settings, and exposure to harmful or age-inappropriate content that can influence behaviour, mental health and social development.
It also noted a growing number of cases involving hacked accounts caused by password sharing and poor digital security awareness.
The organisation said parents and communities must play a central role in updating protective tools, something that was not the case until recently in many Iraqi households with kids often in their bedrooms without supervision.
Psychologist Faleh Al-Quraishi warned that children are increasingly shifting “from social beings to virtual beings”, describing heavy screen use as “screen addiction”, a condition he compared to chemical dependency. Excessive exposure, he said, pushes children “into a cycle of anxiety, tension and social isolation”, contributing to declining academic performance.
"Without open conversation between parents and children about online risks, minors are left highly exposed to dangerous content,” he added.
The human rights body urged the Iraqi government, parliament and relevant agencies to adopt a national digital-child-protection strategy that covers legislation, prevention and monitoring. It called on authorities to accelerate the passage of a long-delayed Child Protection Law, integrate digital literacy into school curricula from the primary level and tighten penalties for online blackmail and exploitation of minors.
Among its recommendations were the creation of a national hotline for reporting incidents, enforcing child-privacy obligations on telecom operators and social-media platforms, and strengthening cooperation with UNICEF and international organisations to track emerging risks and update protective policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment