Reddit has filed a challenge against Australia's under-16s social media ban in the high court just days after introducing age restrictions on its own platform. The move comes as the company argues that the law unfairly impacts not only minors but also adults, who are forced to undergo invasive verification processes.
In a post on Reddit, the platform expressed its support for protecting young people online while criticizing the law's "illogical patchwork" approach, which it claims singles out certain platforms without adequate justification. The company notes that many of these platforms already have age-restricted measures in place and argue that their primary function is not to facilitate real-time social networking among minors.
Reddit asserts that its platform is primarily used by adults, and advertising on the site is not targeted towards children under 18. The Apple app store rating for Reddit is 17+, further supporting this claim.
The company's challenge is centered around its right to free speech and the implied freedom of political communication. In a statement, Reddit emphasized that it has always been committed to preserving user anonymity and collecting minimal personal information, which sets it apart from traditional social media platforms.
Experts have weighed in on the matter, with one constitutional law professor arguing that the current law is too broad and may infringe upon the right to freedom of expression. A challenge to the law is seen as a crucial step in ensuring that online communication remains free from undue restriction.
The Australian Human Rights Commission has previously stated that there are less restrictive alternatives available to protect children and young people online without impacting human rights. The court hearing for Reddit's challenge is expected to take place sometime next year, although the specific date has not been confirmed.
In a post on Reddit, the platform expressed its support for protecting young people online while criticizing the law's "illogical patchwork" approach, which it claims singles out certain platforms without adequate justification. The company notes that many of these platforms already have age-restricted measures in place and argue that their primary function is not to facilitate real-time social networking among minors.
Reddit asserts that its platform is primarily used by adults, and advertising on the site is not targeted towards children under 18. The Apple app store rating for Reddit is 17+, further supporting this claim.
The company's challenge is centered around its right to free speech and the implied freedom of political communication. In a statement, Reddit emphasized that it has always been committed to preserving user anonymity and collecting minimal personal information, which sets it apart from traditional social media platforms.
Experts have weighed in on the matter, with one constitutional law professor arguing that the current law is too broad and may infringe upon the right to freedom of expression. A challenge to the law is seen as a crucial step in ensuring that online communication remains free from undue restriction.
The Australian Human Rights Commission has previously stated that there are less restrictive alternatives available to protect children and young people online without impacting human rights. The court hearing for Reddit's challenge is expected to take place sometime next year, although the specific date has not been confirmed.
come on! like, Australia needs to chill out with this social media ban 
they're just trying to control everything 
it's all so unfair to the creators who are just trying to make a living 
i mean, can't we just have some free speech online without being treated like kids? 
this whole thing just seems like a bunch of bureaucratic nonsense 
and now Reddit's taking them to court 
i hope they win, for the love of all things good 
. I think it's great that Reddit is speaking up against this law, but at the same time, we should be doing more to protect our young ones from harm online. As a parent, it's hard enough trying to navigate all the social media platforms and keep my little ones safe, without feeling like there's always another new rule or regulation popping up 
.
. Maybe we can explore more education programs or online resources that teach kids how to be responsible online citizens? Something has to give here 
Reddit's argument about preserving user anonymity is valid, but I'm not sure if it's enough to override the concerns about protecting kids online.
]
]
]
. Most platforms already have age restrictions in place, so what's the big deal? 
And honestly, who's gonna enforce it anyway? 
... it's easy enough for kids to get on reddit if they know what to search for or have friends who already have an account.
.
so Australia thinks it can just ban social media for under-16s like that? I mean, what's next, a national curfew? 
and now reddit's all up in arms about it because they're basically saying "hey, we don't want to be targeted by this law either". Can't blame 'em really, I'm still waiting for them to explain why they need to verify my age every time I try to post a funny meme 
and rds is all about preserving user anonymity anyway so whats the big deal? anyway i hope reddit wins this thing and shows australia that free speech is important 
at the same time, i can see how it would be unfair if adults have to go through some invasive verification process just because they want to use the site...
reddit's all like "hey, we're not a real social network for teens" and honestly, idk if that's true... 
anyway, can't wait to see what the court says, fingers crossed for free speech! 
. Reddit's always been about free speech and stuff, but what if this law starts to affect the way we communicate as adults too? It feels like they're trying to regulate us just because it's easy 
.
. And what's up with the Apple app store rating? Like, if it's 17+, does that mean they're really just letting minors hang out over there too? 
. meanwhile, the apple app store rating for reddit is 17+, which suggests that most of their users are adults anyway.
. On one hand, it's reasonable to want to protect minors online and ensure they're not exposed to harm. But on the other hand, the current law is pretty broad and could potentially infringe upon people's freedom of expression 
. Reddit can't just claim they're not targeting minors while simultaneously trying to avoid regulations that might affect their own business model 
. Reddit's got some valid points about its platform being more geared towards adults, and I'm kinda surprised that the gov't isn't seeing it that way 
. Maybe we can finally get a clear answer on what's considered 'acceptable' when it comes to social media regulation 
It'll be interesting to see how the court rules and whether there are any changes made to protect young people online without infringing on adults' rights too.