Is Social Media bad for mental health?

[Sher Khan]

I feel like my heart is always racing the moment I wake up to pick up my phone and check social media. I then spend most of my day being unproductive on social media.

I have always felt guilty about it, as my studies are definitely affected by my social media use. But more importantly, my mental health has never been great and I am starting to wonder if my social media use has to do with it.

I feel like my dopamine receptors have become messed up. Social Media also has majority of vulgar content, to be blunt I feel social media is all porn these days. That is not a good thing for me personally, because then upon viewing it I usually feel "weird" especially if I'm in a public place.

As a result, my social media use is making me feel guilty but as I mentioned my dopamine receptors are messed by it and now I feel addicted to social media.

 

[James]

Social media can certainly be terrible for mental health.

Sounds in your situation that you have become addicted to an unhealthy degree, you may need some help and support.

Start by deleting those apps for a while.

 

[Robert]

Yes, quite apart from the hate mill of social media, the constant swiping provides a natural high which over time depletes dopamine in your head.

 

[Sher Khan]

Social media can certainly be terrible for mental health.

Sounds in your situation that you have become addicted to an unhealthy degree, you may need some help and support.

Start by deleting those apps for a while.

Okay brother, I will delete those apps and see how I feel after a while.

My other concern is potential employers, etc. Suggesting young people to have social media connections these days to get a good career and move up in the professional world.

Perhaps, keeping that in mind it has become hard for young people to balance "good" and "bad" social media use.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Everything's bad if the consumer cannot moderate. People have always eyed and touted so it's just an extension of that?

RSI is definitely a thing, however

 

[Technics 1210]

Social Media is great, but the trick is to filter what you want to read, and when you want to read.

I love synching up in the evenings on my favourite topics (Video Games, Aviation, Gold etc), takes about an hour, and sure beats MSM programmed nonsense.

Plus SM is an effective way to keep in touch with friends and family.

What you want - when you want. You control SM, SM does not control you.

 

[Technics 1210]

Another point, Social Media provides an insight into what the public is thinking. Some people may not be comfortable with personal opinions which disagree with theirs, but it’s great to gauge public opinion. Depp & Heard trial is a great example., newspapers articles comments too.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Your social media a true reflection of who you are?

 

[sweep_shot]

It has both positives and negatives.

If you can filter out unwanted people/information, experience can be quite pleasant.

 

[gani999]

Anything can be bad for your mental health if you get obsessed with it. There should always be a balance.
It is the same with social media. You should be able to control your access to it, and what it does to your mind. You are finished if you allow it to control you.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Australia proposes 'world-leading' ban on social media for children under 16

The Australian government will legislate for a ban on social media for children under 16, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Thursday, in what it calls a world-leading package of measures that could become law late next year.

Australia is trialing an age-verification system to assist in blocking children from accessing social media platforms, as part of a range of measures that include some of the toughest controls imposed by any country to date.

"Social media is doing harm to our kids and I'm calling time on it," Albanese told a news conference.

Albanese cited the risks to physical and mental health of children from excessive social media use, in particular the risks to girls from harmful depictions of body image, and misogynist content aimed at boys.

"If you're a 14-year-old kid getting this stuff, at a time where you're going through life's changes and maturing, it can be a really difficult time and what we're doing is listening and then acting," he said.

A number of countries have already vowed to curb social media use by children through legislation, though Australia's policy is one of the most stringent.

No jurisdiction so far has tried using age verification methods like biometrics or government identification to enforce a social media age cut-off, two of the methods being trialed.

Australia's other world-first proposals are the highest age limit set by any country, no exemption for parental consent and no exemption for pre-existing accounts.

Legislation will be introduced into the Australian parliament this year, with the laws coming into effect 12 months after being ratified by lawmakers, Albanese said.

The opposition Liberal Party has expressed support for a ban.

There will be no exemptions for children who have parental consent, or who already have accounts.

"The onus will be on social media platforms to demonstrate they are taking reasonable steps to prevent access," Albanese said. "The onus won't be on parents or young people."

"What we are announcing here and what we will legislate will be truly world leading," Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said.

Rowland said platforms impacted would include Meta Platforms' Instagram and Facebook, as well as Bytedance's TikTok and Elon Musk's X. Alphabet's YouTube would likely also fall within the scope of the legislation, she added.

TikTok declined to comment, while Meta, Alphabet and X did not respond to requests for comment.

The Digital Industry Group, a representative body which includes Meta, TikTok, X and Alphabet's Google as members, said the measure could encourage young people to explore darker, unregulated parts of the internet while cutting their access to support networks.

"Keeping young people safe online is a top priority ... but the proposed ban for teenagers to access digital platforms is a 20th Century response to 21st Century challenges," said DIGI Managing Director Sunita Bose.

"Rather than blocking access through bans, we need to take a balanced approach to create age-appropriate spaces, build digital literacy and protect young people from online harm," she added.

France last year proposed a ban on social media for those under 15, though users were able to avoid the ban with parental consent.

The United States has for decades required technology companies to seek parental consent to access the data of children under 13, leading to most social media platforms banning those under that age from accessing their services.

REUTERS

 

[BouncerGuy]

Australia wants to ban kids from social media. Will it work?

“I felt really scared to be honest,” says James, describing an incident on Snapchat that left him questioning whether it was safe to go to school.

The Australian boy, 12, had had a disagreement with a friend, and one night before bed the boy added him to a group chat with two older teenagers.

Almost instantly, his phone “started blowing up” with a string of violent messages.

“One of them sounded like he was probably 17,” James tells the BBC. “He sent me videos of him with a machete… he was waving it around. Then there were voice messages saying that they were going to catch me and stab me.”

James - not his real name - first joined Snapchat when he was 10, after a classmate suggested everyone in their friendship group get the app. But after telling his parents about his cyberbullying experience, which was ultimately resolved by his school, James deleted his account.

His experience is a cautionary tale that shows why the Australian government’s proposed social media ban on children under 16 is necessary, says his mother Emma, who is also using a pseudonym.

The laws, which were tabled in parliament's lower house on Thursday, have been billed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as “world-leading”.

But while many parents have applauded the move, some experts have questioned whether kids should - or even can - be barred from accessing social media, and what the adverse effects of doing so may be.

What is Australia proposing?

Albanese says the ban - which will cover platforms such as X, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram - is about protecting kids from the “harms” of social media.

"This is a global problem and we want young Australians essentially to have a childhood. We want parents to have peace of mind," he said on Thursday.

The new legislation provides a "framework" for the ban. But the 17-page document, which is expected to head to the Senate next week, is sparse on detail.

Instead, it will be up to the nation’s internet regulator - the eSafety Commissioner - to hash out how to implement and enforce the rules, which will not come into effect for at least 12 months after legislation is passed.

According to the bill, the ban will apply to all children under 16 and that there will be no exemptions for existing users or those with parental consent.

Tech companies will face penalties of up to A$50m ($32.5m; £25.7) if they do not comply, but there will be exemptions for platforms which are able to create “low-risk services" deemed suitable for kids. Criteria for this threshold are yet to be set.

Messaging services and gaming sites, however, will not be restricted, as will some sites that can be accessed without an account like YouTube, which has prompted questions over how regulators will determine what is and isn’t a social media platform in a fast-moving landscape.

A group representing the interests of tech companies such as Meta, Snapchat and X in Australia has dismissed the ban as “a 20th Century response to 21st Century challenges”.

Such legislation could push kids into “dangerous, unregulated parts of the internet”, Digital Industry Group Inc says - a fear also expressed by some experts.

eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has acknowledged the gargantuan task her office will face when enforcing the ban, given “technology change is always going to outpace policy”.

“It will always be fluid, and this is why regulators like eSafety have to be nimble,” she told BBC Radio 5 Live.

But Ms Inman Grant has also raised concerns about the central idea behind the government’s policy, which is that there’s a causal link between social media and declining mental health.

“I would say that the evidence base is not settled at all,” she said, pointing to research from her own office which found that some of the most vulnerable groups, such as LGBTQ+ or First Nations teenagers, “feel more themselves online than they do in the real world”.

This is a sentiment echoed by Lucas Lane, 15, who runs an online business selling nail polish to boys. “This [ban] destroys… my friendships and the ability to make people feel seen,” the Perth teenager tells the BBC.

Ms Inman Grant would rather see tech companies clean up their platforms, as well as more investment in education tools to help young people stay safe online. She uses the analogy of teaching children to swim, rather than banning them from the water.

“We don’t fence the ocean… but we do create protected swimming environments that provide safeguards and teach important lessons from a young age,” she told parliament earlier this year.

But parents like Emma see it differently.

“Should we really be wasting our time trying to help kids navigate these difficult systems when tech companies just want them on them all the time?" she says.

“Or should we just allow them to be kids and learn how to be sociable outside with each other, and then start these discussions later on?”

Amy Friedlander, a mother of three from the Wait Mate movement - which encourages parents to delay giving their kids smartphones - agrees.

“We can’t ignore all the positives that technology has brought into our lives. There are huge upsides, but what we haven’t really considered is the impact it is having on brains which aren’t ready for it.”

'Too blunt an instrument'

Over 100 Australian academics have criticised the ban as "too blunt an instrument" and argued that it goes against UN advice which calls on governments to ensure young people have “safe access” to digital environments.

It has also failed to win the backing of a bipartisan parliamentary committee that’s been examining the impact of social media on adolescents. Instead, the committee recommended that tech giants face tougher regulations.

To address some of those concerns, the government says it will eventually introduce "digital duty of care" laws, which will make it a legal obligation for tech companies to prioritise user safety.

Joanne Orlando, a researcher in digital behaviour, argues that while a ban “could be part of a strategy, it absolutely can’t be the whole strategy”.

She says “the biggest piece of the puzzle” should be educating kids to think critically about the content they see on their feeds and how they use social media.

The government has already spent A$6m since 2022 to develop free “digital literacy tools” to try and do just that. However, research suggests that many young Australians aren’t receiving regular lessons.

Ms Orlando and other experts warn there are also significant hurdles to making the age-verification technology - which is required to enforce the ban - effective and safe, given the “enormous risks” associated with potentially housing the identification documents of every Australian online.

The government has said it is aiming to solve that challenge through age-verification trials, and hopes to table a report by mid-next year. It has promised that privacy concerns will be front and centre, but offered little detail on what kind of technology will actually be tested.

In its advice, the eSafety Commissioner has floated the idea of using a third-party service to anonymise a user’s ID before it is passed on to any age verification sites, to “preserve” their privacy.

However, Ms Orlando remains sceptical. “I can’t think of any technology that exists at this point that can pull this off,” she tells the BBC.

Will Australia succeed?

Australia is by no means the first country to try to restrict how young people access certain websites or platforms online.

In 2011, South Korea passed its “shutdown law” which prevented children under 16 from playing internet games between 22:30 and 6:00, but the rules - which faced backlash - were later scrapped citing the need to “respect the rights of youths”.

More recently France introduced legislation requiring social media platforms to block access to children under 15 without parental consent. Research indicated almost half of users were able to circumvent the ban using a simple VPN.

A law in the US state of Utah - which was similar to Australia’s - ran into a different issue: it was blocked by a federal judge who found it unconstitutional.

Albanese has conceded that Australia's proposal may not be foolproof, and if it passes the parliament, it would be subject to a review.

"We all know technology moves fast and some people will try to find ways around these new laws but that is not a reason to ignore the responsibility that we have," he told lawmakers.

But for parents like Emma and Ms Friedlander - who have lobbied for the changes - it's the message that the ban sends which matters most.

“For too long parents have had this impossible choice between giving in and getting their child an addictive device or seeing their child isolated and feeling left out socially,” Ms Friedlander says.

“We’ve been trapped in a norm that no one wants to be a part of.”

James says that since quitting Snapchat he’s found himself spending more time outside with friends.

And he hopes that the new laws could enable more kids like him to “get out and do the things they love” instead of feeling pressured to be online.

BBC

 

[Bhaijaan]

It is bad for us but we are trapped by it and a complete escape is almost impossible. You can work on minimising exposure to needless media but the thing is even if you narrow down your interests will still concentrate in the media you feel is bringing joy or value to you and eventually your screen time will remain the same. We are doomed and on our way to being completely controlled by A.I. I don’t think our distant generations in future will be running or even doing a lot of walking. Everything will be available to them at fingertips just as we saw in scary sci fi movies.

 

[Ball Blazer]

On this Mental Health Day, we want to remind everyone that PakPassion is more than just a cricket forum, it is a community where every voice matters. Whether you are celebrating a big win, struggling with life off the field, or simply need someone to listen, this space is open for you.

talk cricket, but we also care about the people behind the posts. So, do not hesitate to share what is on your mind, your feelings are valid, and you are never alone here.

 

[Bewal Express]

I have seen many kids go into melt down when they dont likes for their posts or get little traction for their social media activity.

 

[sweep_shot]

I do not get affected by social media.

I grew up with 4Chan, 8Chan, IRC, Yahoo Chat etc. I was exposed to high level of online toxicity.

So, social media doesn't affect me mentally no matter how toxic some of the people are. Even the nastiest troll has very little affect on me.

 

[SherWaqar]

It’s what you make of it

 

[JaDed]

Literally every study suggests so not only social media but continuous distractions are ruining the brain, everyone is amusing themselves to death.

 

[JaDed]

I have seen many kids go into melt down when they dont likes for their posts or get little traction for their social media activity.

Yeah it’s not kids anymore but even adults, there is a reason why cringe videos are getting likes, rage baiting has become common etc..

 

[sweep_shot]

I first started to use social media back in 2006. Since then, I have been to flash chat rooms, IRC chat rooms, online forums, Reddit, Discord, Facebook, WhatsApp, 4Chan, 8Chan, Yahoo Chat etc.

I also used to be a moderator at a chat room and I had my own online forum (which I launched with a friend).

There were times when social media negatively impacted my mental health. But, that no longer happens now as I got used to with social media toxicity.

If you can't tolerate someone's post, you can always block or ignore I guess. That can cushion your mental health a bit.

 

[Bewal Express]

Yeah it’s not kids anymore but even adults, there is a reason why cringe videos are getting likes, rage baiting has become common etc..

For children Social media is a destructive force. Ban all kids from owning smart phones except especially adapted ones whicg alllow them to acces apps for safety etc. We have damaged children for Profit and the only winners are big tech.

 

[Rajdeep]

I first started to use social media back in 2006. Since then, I have been to flash chat rooms, IRC chat rooms, online forums, Reddit, Discord, Facebook, WhatsApp, 4Chan, 8Chan, Yahoo Chat etc.

I also used to be a moderator at a chat room and I had my own online forum (which I launched with a friend).

There were times when social media negatively impacted my mental health. But, that no longer happens now as I got used to with social media toxicity.

If you can't tolerate someone's post, you can always block or ignore I guess. That can cushion your mental health a bit.

Then what is the point of being in social media if you cant digest opposing opinion? Blocking someone in virtual world is a projection of cowardice. You need to face them with head on.

 

[sweep_shot]

Then what is the point of being in social media if you cant digest opposing opinion? Blocking someone in virtual world is a projection of cowardice. You need to face them with head on.

For me, it is all about passing time while feeling good. I am not interested in opposing views.

I am on social media to pass time, make friends, and learn things.

 

[JaDed]

For children Social media is a destructive force. Ban all kids from owning smart phones except especially adapted ones whicg alllow them to acces apps for safety etc. We have damaged children for Profit and the only winners are big tech.

Yes I think some european country has done that and it’s absolutely right.

 

[JaDed]

I first started to use social media back in 2006. Since then, I have been to flash chat rooms, IRC chat rooms, online forums, Reddit, Discord, Facebook, WhatsApp, 4Chan, 8Chan, Yahoo Chat etc.

I also used to be a moderator at a chat room and I had my own online forum (which I launched with a friend).

There were times when social media negatively impacted my mental health. But, that no longer happens now as I got used to with social media toxicity.

If you can't tolerate someone's post, you can always block or ignore I guess. That can cushion your mental health a bit.

It’s more complicated than that, I have been reading about this from last 1 year , and the latest book has been “Upward Spiral”, in my humble opinion the mental health due to emotional agitation from social media is bad yes but giving attention to social media posts etc is also causing issues as the amusement is releasing dopamine, making us form bad habits.

This along with so many other attention eating habits is literally changing our brain’s receptors, we need an easy flow as in neuro connectivity within our brain that happens when we actually focus on one task(could be work), example a hobby , physical exercise etc etc..
having a phone or tv on, video games , , consuming irrelevant information is literally causing our brains to fry, this is leading to depression, anxiety , attention deficiency etc etc

 

[Hitman]

Don't know, don't care either. I have thoroughly loved social media. Although my first love still remains Yahoo! Messenger.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Too much of anything is bad for your health... SOcial media is on top LOL

 

[Suleiman]

It’s more complicated than that, I have been reading about this from last 1 year , and the latest book has been “Upward Spiral”, in my humble opinion the mental health due to emotional agitation from social media is bad yes but giving attention to social media posts etc is also causing issues as the amusement is releasing dopamine, making us form bad habits.

This along with so many other attention eating habits is literally changing our brain’s receptors, we need an easy flow as in neuro connectivity within our brain that happens when we actually focus on one task(could be work), example a hobby , physical exercise etc etc..
having a phone or tv on, video games , , consuming irrelevant information is literally causing our brains to fry, this is leading to depression, anxiety , attention deficiency etc etc

Basically echoes what you wrote and I largely agree. Imo this weakening of attention span via artificial hits of dopamine via social media can also fractures a man’s ability to hold space in a relationship whether it’s with his wife or raising kids because the attention span muscle is weakened to such a large extent… and both wife and kids require attention. Also a lot of marriages and relationships ending these days has social media play a major part for one reason or another.

But big tech wants it that way, they hire scientists and such for apps to keep people hooked and numb their senses.

Social media has its uses, but its unregulated consumption can affect our lifestyles in major ways that we may not even realize because it’s become the norm.

 

[Kianig89]

AI and stress levels are highly correlated.

 

[sweep_shot]

It’s more complicated than that, I have been reading about this from last 1 year , and the latest book has been “Upward Spiral”, in my humble opinion the mental health due to emotional agitation from social media is bad yes but giving attention to social media posts etc is also causing issues as the amusement is releasing dopamine, making us form bad habits.

This along with so many other attention eating habits is literally changing our brain’s receptors, we need an easy flow as in neuro connectivity within our brain that happens when we actually focus on one task(could be work), example a hobby , physical exercise etc etc..
having a phone or tv on, video games , , consuming irrelevant information is literally causing our brains to fry, this is leading to depression, anxiety , attention deficiency etc etc

Good point.

"Information overload" can cause stress and exhaustion.

Human memory only has around 2.5 petabytes of space. So, we have to be careful what we fill up our memories with. It is like how we don't want junk files in our computers.

 

[JaDed]

Basically echoes what you wrote and I largely agree. Imo this weakening of attention span via artificial hits of dopamine via social media can also fractures a man’s ability to hold space in a relationship whether it’s with his wife or raising kids because the attention span muscle is weakened to such a large extent… and both wife and kids require attention. Also a lot of marriages and relationships ending these days has social media play a major part for one reason or another.

But big tech wants it that way, they hire scientists and such for apps to keep people hooked and numb their senses.

Social media has its uses, but its unregulated consumption can affect our lifestyles in major ways that we may not even realize because it’s become the norm.

Yes , Big tech esp meta is notorious for this, its actually a health emergency but no one cares..

 

[topspin]

AI and stress levels are highly correlated.

How? I thought AI was meant to make our life simpler.

 

[Markhor]

I liken social media to a car in that both are immensely useful tools for human advancement but require stringent regulation for the good of society. Imagine driving a car in a world without speed limits, traffic lights, driving tests, seatbelts etc.

This is an unrivalled era in human history as far as access to information is concerned. There are few gatekeepers to knowledge. However equally concerning is the access to misinformation - some of it actively harming public health. One example is the nonsense pseudoscience regarding vaccinations which has meant preventable diseases like measles are making a comeback. Suddenly after watching a few Instagram reels and reading dubiously sourced posts from the University of WhatsApp - some consider themselves more expert than medical professionals who've spent years specialising in their fields.

It's also now easier than ever to scam someone out of their hard earned money, to destroy one's reputation based on falsehoods, to malign entire communities or spread poisonous ideologies.

Nuanced conversations and civil discussions are far easier face-to-face, while much of social media is designed to ragebait, provoke and divide. This platform is an example. I recall some incredibly thoughtful long form debates back in the day which, while spirited, remained generally civil whereas personal attacks are now routine.

You could argue democracy itself is endangered by social media. If one of the prerequisites for a democracy is having a well informed public - how does that square with the fact many believe the weather is controlled by human beings operating machines, climate change is a hoax, JFK Jr didn't die from a plane crash and will return one day, and so on ?

 

[hassan918]

Everyone knows that it is bad for the mental health but still everyone uses it.

 

[hassan918]

The European Parliament close to calling for a ban on social networks for under-16s​

Brussels – The issue of protecting minors online and the possible imposition of a digital age at the EU level is coming to the fore in the European Parliament. The Brussels chamber could be the first—following up on the alarms launched by several member states—to request that the European Commission propose a ban on access to social media for children under 16. The driving force behind this is primarily the centrist “platform” led by the People’s Party (EPP) and the Socialists (S&D).

The data held by MEPs are disturbing: 97 per cent of young people use the Internet daily, 78 per cent of 13 to 17 year olds say they check their devices at least every hour, 16 to 24 year olds spend an average of more than seven hours a day on the Internet, 84 per cent of 11 to 14 year olds play video games regularly. And one in four young people “show problematic or dysfunctional use” of smartphones.

The European Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) took this snapshot as a starting point for drafting a non-legislative resolution prepared by socialist Christel Schaldemose, which was approved on 4 November by a large majority. Next week, the text calling for “the establishment of a harmonised European digital age limit of 16 years as the default threshold below which access to online social media platforms should not be allowed, unless parents or guardians have authorised their children to do so” will go to the plenary session.

Not only that, the text approved in IMCO calls for “the same age limit to apply to video-sharing platforms and artificial intelligence assistants that present risks to minors” and above all “a harmonised European digital age limit of 13 years, below which no minors can access social media platforms.” The European Commission has been working for some time on tighter measures to protect minors from the risks of addiction, abuse, and exposure to harmful content online. The Digital Services Act, in force since 2024, obliges large platforms to assess the risks to youngsters and put in place effective tools to prevent them. In July, Brussels launched a pilot project in five member states (including Italy) to test an online age verification application that would allow platforms to receive only proof that the user is or is not of age, without having to ask for personal data.

What is more, in the pipeline is the European Digital Identity Wallet, with which “you will be able to keep full control of your data, but authenticate and verify your age when using certain services.” But so far, the European Commission has always rejected the possibility of imposing a digital age at the EU level. As stipulated by the Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), “it is up to the member states to establish and set the digital age between 13 and 16 years,” spokesman Thomas Regnier had explained a few months ago, responding to French President Emmanuel Macron’s requests.

The first issue is inevitably that of privacy protection: “Any age verification tool used should guarantee the highest level of accuracy and reliability and meet strict data protection and cybersecurity criteria to ensure its compliance with our fundamental rights,” the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) group emphasised in a
press release ahead of the vote.

In addition to the Socialists, the EPP is also pushing for “social media access for children under the age of 16 to be allowed only with parental consent,” the group’s spokesman Daniel Köster confirmed today. The Renew Liberals and Greens are also expected to be on board. From the right-wing benches, the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR)—who had opposed the resolution in the IMCO committee—warned of the risk that the goal of stronger safeguards for children “would become a pretext to turn the Internet into a space of constant identification and surveillance.” The Conservative group’s line is that “parents should remain in charge”: spokesman Michael Strauss stated that “the Commission should strengthen parental control tools rather than monitoring every user.”

On parental control tools, the resolution under consideration by the EU Parliament is more sceptical: it claims that they “remain fragmented across different platforms and devices and are often difficult for parents to use effectively.” And that the latter “often lack the appropriate and effective knowledge, skills and tools to monitor and manage children’s online activities.”

The European Parliament close to calling for a ban on social networks for under-16s

The non-legislative resolution already approved by a large majority in the parliamentary committee goes to the plenary session. Populars and Socialists push for tightening, ECR calls for "strengthening parental control tools rather than monitoring every user"

www.eunews.it

 

[JaDed]

For all its fault Europeans are progressive, issue is the productivity levels vary so much across European countries it’s insane.

Well done to ban social media for developing brains, absolute must.

 

[hassan918]

Australian teenagers ask High Court to block social media ban​

SYDNEY, Nov 26 (Reuters) - A constitutional challenge against Australia’s social media ban on children younger than 16 has been filed in the nation’s highest court, two weeks before the world-first law is set to take effect.

A campaign group called the Digital Freedom Project said on Wednesday it launched proceedings in the High Court of Australia in a bid to block the law, with two 15-year-olds, Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, as plaintiffs in the case.

More than one million accounts held by teenagers under 16 are set to be deactivated in Australia when the ban on platforms including YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat (SNAP.N), opens new tab and Meta's (META.O), opens new tab Facebook and Instagram starts on December 10.

In a statement on Wednesday, the Digital Freedom Project said the ban "robs" young Australians of their freedom of political communication, an implied right in the constitution. Australia does not have an express right to free speech.

"The legislation is grossly excessive," the statement said.

Neyland said the law would ban young people from expressing their views online.

"Young people like me are the voters of tomorrow ... we shouldn't be silenced. It's like Orwell's book 1984, and that scares me," she said.

The Digital Freedom Project’s president is John Ruddick, a member of the Libertarian Party in the New South Wales state Parliament.

After news of the legal challenge broke, Communications Minister Anika Wells told Parliament the centre-left government, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, would not be intimidated by threats and legal challenges.

"Despite the fact that we are receiving threats and legal challenges by people with ulterior motives, the Albanese Labor government remains steadfastly on the side of parents, and not of platforms," Wells said.

Australian media has reported that YouTube also threatened to launch a High Court challenge on the grounds the ban burdened political communication.

Governments and tech firms around the world are closely watching Australia's effort to implement the ban, one of the most comprehensive efforts to police minors' social media access.

The ban was passed into law in November 2024 and is supported by the majority of Australians, according to opinion polling.

The government said research showed the over-use of social media was harming young teens, including causing misinformation, enabling bullying and harmful depictions of body image.

Companies that fail to comply with the ban could face penalties of up to A$49.5 million ($32.22 million).

Source: REUTERS

 

[sweep_shot]

I support social media ban till age of 13 maybe. 16 is too much.

They should modify it and make the ban effective till age of 13.