Australia’s landmark under-16 social media ban has triggered criticism from Reddit, which calls the law “legally erroneous” but says it will comply as the rules take effect on December 10.
 |
| As Australia enforces the world’s first social media ban for under-16s, Reddit denounces the law’s logic and impact while preparing age-detection systems to comply. Image: CH |
SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA — December 9, 2025:
On the eve of Australia’s unprecedented ban on social media accounts for under-16s, Reddit has sharply criticised the legislation as “legally erroneous,” even as it confirmed it will comply with the sweeping new rules. The law, which comes into force on December 10, marks the first attempt by any government to impose a nationwide age cutoff on major platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, YouTube and Reddit.
Reddit, one of the last tech firms to publicly confirm its stance, made its position clear in a statement acknowledging both compliance and deep disagreement. The company argues that the law’s structure is flawed, its targeting arbitrary, and its privacy implications severe. Although Reddit did not confirm whether it may mount a legal challenge, it warned that identity verification requirements fundamentally threaten online anonymity and free expression.
At the centre of the dispute is Reddit’s claim that applying the ban to a largely text-based, pseudonymous forum used primarily by adults does not align with Parliament’s intent. The company contends that the exemption list—covering platforms like Roblox, Pinterest and WhatsApp—undercuts the logic of regulating Reddit while sparing other services that host large numbers of children. It argues that the discrepancy shows inconsistent legislative reasoning and an uneven understanding of online risk.
Under the new law, platforms must take “reasonable steps” to prevent under-16s from creating accounts or risk penalties of up to A$49.5 million. Reddit plans to deploy an age-prediction model to detect and suspend users believed to be under the age threshold and has committed to rolling out enhanced safety features for all users under 18 globally. Other major platforms are expected to implement similar detection mechanisms as the regulations take effect.
The impact of the ban is likely to be substantial. Instagram alone counts roughly 350,000 Australian users aged 13 to 15, and overall, hundreds of thousands of teenagers are expected to lose access to their accounts. Officials acknowledge the inevitability of attempts to bypass restrictions, whether through fake IDs or AI-manipulated images. Regulators admit that no verification system will be foolproof but insist that platforms must still build robust protections.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has framed the restrictions not as punishment but as a form of support, urging teens to embrace offline experiences during the upcoming summer holidays. In a public message, he encouraged young people to rediscover pastimes beyond screens, invoking sports, music and in-person time with family and friends as healthier alternatives to algorithm-driven environments.
Beyond Australia, the world is watching closely. Malaysia has already announced plans to roll out a similar ban next year, and New Zealand is weighing the idea. Policymakers globally are scrutinising whether Australia’s experiment will meaningfully reduce digital harms or whether enforcement challenges and privacy concerns will overshadow its aims.
As the ban begins, the clash between child-safety ambitions and digital-rights concerns underscores a deeper tension shaping global internet governance. Australia’s move signals a new era of interventionist regulation, and Reddit’s sharp critique highlights the unresolved debate over how far governments should go in reshaping the online lives of young people.