The Australian government has told the High Court that its “world‑leading” ban on social‑media use for children under 16 was introduced before a scientific consensus linked the platforms to mental‑health harms, but it says “credible risks” such as addictive behaviour and anxiety are sufficient justification for the policy.
The statement was made in the government’s defence against a High Court challenge to the ban, which argues that the restriction may be unlawful. In its filing, the government acknowledged the lack of definitive scientific agreement on the causal relationship between teenage social‑media use and mental‑health outcomes.
At the same time, the government argued that its proposed “digital duty of care” legislation – which would let users opt out of algorithmic feeds and other platform features – would ultimately achieve the same protective effect as the outright ban if it were enacted.
Australia’s under‑16 ban, announced in 2023, has been described by officials as a pioneering step to curb potential harms to young people. The policy reflects growing international concern about the impact of social‑media algorithms on adolescents’ wellbeing.
While the High Court deliberates, the government maintains that the precautionary approach embodied in both the ban and the forthcoming duty‑of‑care measures is warranted given the “credible risks” identified, even in the absence of a settled scientific consensus.
<small>Source: The Guardian — read the original story there.</small>
