Teens fight social media ban in Australian high court

Nov. 26 (UPI) -- Two Australian teens, along with a rights organization, are fighting the country's social media ban for those under 16 in its Supreme Court.

Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, both 15, are plaintiffs in the legal challenge filed Wednesday, along with the Digital Freedom Project. They are fighting a new law that goes into effect on Dec. 10 that bans children under 16 from social media.

The Online Safety Act is meant to protect children and young teens from the harm of social media, but the teens argue that safeguards are a better and less restrictive way to protect them.

"We're disappointed in a lazy government that blanket bans under-16s rather than investing in programs to help kids be safe on social media," Jones said.

Related

• British regulator urges tech firms to do more to protect women, girls
• Court filing: Meta shut down mental health study
• Malaysia to ban social media for users under 16

Neyland said young people should not be barred from expressing their views.

"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," she said.

John Ruddick, Digital Freedom Project president, said the ban was disproportionate and placed parental responsibility on the government and "unelected bureaucrats." Ruddick is a member of the New South Wales upper house and is a member of the Libertarian Party.

"This ban is a direct assault on young people's right to freedom of political communication," he said in a statement.

Communications Minister Anika Wells told parliament the government would not bend.

"We will not be intimidated by threats. We will not be intimidated by legal challenges. We will not be intimidated by big tech. On behalf of Australian parents, we will stand firm," she said.

The Digital Freedom Project shared its reasons for fighting the ban.

"Evidence already before Parliament shows teens rely on these platforms for information and association; cutting them off would fall hardest on young people with disability, First Nations youth, rural and remote kids and LGBTIQ+ teens - those who already face the longest road to participation," the organization said on its website.

It agreed that protecting children is important, "But a blanket account ban is a stupid, unconstitutional, blunt tool. It disregards hundreds of years of the right of freedom of speech for everyone - not just adults. It completely disregards the rights of children."

Polls show that the ban is supported by most Australian adults, the BBC reported. But some mental health advocates say it could cut some kids off from connection to others, and some argue that it could push kids to less-regulated parts of the Internet.