Australia's eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant says the rollout of the federal government's upcoming social media age restrictions will not look the same on every platform, acknowledging that enforcement will depend heavily on the approach taken by individual tech companies.
Australia's eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant says the rollout of the federal government's upcoming social media age restrictions will not look the same on every platform, acknowledging that enforcement will depend heavily on the approach taken by individual tech companies.
Her comments come as documents filed in the High Court seek an injunction to halt the new laws, which are due to begin on December 10. The Commonwealth, Ms Inman Grant and Communications Minister Anika Wells have all been named as defendants in the constitutional challenge.
Despite the legal action, the federal government has pledged to press ahead.
In Question Time, Ms Wells said the government would "defend any legal challenges" on behalf of the thousands of parents who supported the legislation.
The case has been brought by advocacy group the Digital Freedom Project alongside two 15-year-olds, Noah Jones and Macy Neyland. They argue the new requirement - which would remove users under 16 from platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and YouTube - breaches the implied freedom of political communication by cutting young teenagers off from key avenues to engage with news, politicians and civic debate.
Filed in the High Court's Sydney registry, the application asks the court to declare the law invalid or, alternatively, to issue injunctions preventing Ms Inman Grant and Ms Wells from enforcing the minimum age rules through compliance actions or notices.
As the deadline approaches, the Coalition has also clarified its position, after Opposition communications spokeswoman Melissa McIntosh suggested she may reassess the laws if implementation issues emerged.
On Thursday she reaffirmed support for the restrictions, saying: "The Coalition supports the social media ban. We all want this ban to work and to protect children," while noting concerns about additional platforms being brought under the law at short notice.
Ms Inman Grant said she did not expect platforms to seamlessly comply from day one.
"Some will do this really well and really precisely, and some will be a little bit slow and a little bit sloppy," she said.
The legislation requires companies to remove accounts belonging to users under 16 and take "reasonable" steps to prevent underage access. Although platforms risk penalties of up to $49.5 million for failing to comply, the commissioner said enforcement would begin with a "gradual and fair" process before fines were issued.
Platforms will soon be required to provide evidence that they are deactivating accounts belonging to Australian teenagers, with eSafety expecting weekly reports initially, moving to monthly updates.
"We will be compelling them to provide very specific information about what they've done and how many accounts they've deactivated or de-platformed," she said.
In their challenge, the Digital Freedom Project argues the laws will exclude 13- to 15-year-olds from essential channels of political participation and claims the blanket ban is unnecessary and disproportionate. The filing states that less restrictive options - such as enhanced safety settings, parental oversight, or targeted regulation of platform design - could achieve the aim of reducing online harm without sweeping young users off social media entirely.
The claim contends the law is "oppressive, overreaching and inappropriate" and fails to incentivise platforms to address the harmful design features that underpin the government's concerns.
°C
3
Min
