The Battle Over Freedom of Speech: Laws to Protect Children Leading to Increased Surveillance of Adults? Why Reddit Sued Australia

Reddit Sues Australia—Can the "Under16 SNS Regulation" Protect "Freedom"?

In December 2025, Australia's move to effectively restrict social media accounts for those under 16 has faced significant challenges right from the start. The spark was ignited by Reddit, one of the world's largest bulletin board-style communities. Reddit has filed a petition with the High Court of Australia, arguing that this regulation violates the **constitutional "implied freedom of political communication."** Reuters

The aim of the regulation is simple. It requires platforms to take "reasonable measures" to ensure that those under 16 cannot create or maintain accounts on age-restricted social media. While users and parents are not directly penalized, businesses could face civil penalties of up to 49.5 million AUD. The regulatory body eSafety (Online Safety Regulator) is involved as the implementing authority, and the organization of targeted platforms is underway. eSafety Commissioner

eSafety explains that services can be subject to "age restrictions" if they meet certain conditions (such as having the "primary or significant purpose of enabling online interaction among users"). As of November 2025, platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X, YouTube, Kick, and Reddit are included in the list. eSafety Commissioner

Reddit's Argument Is Not Just About "Freedom"—The Core Issues Are "SNS Definition" and "Privacy"

Reddit's concerns are not merely about the policy goal of "protecting children." In its submissions, Reddit argues that (1) the regulation hinders political discussion and access to information, (2) Reddit does not fit the law's definition of "social media" (or it is inappropriate to include it), and (3) the implementation of age verification extends to adults, increasing privacy risks. Reuters

Regarding (1), Reuters reports that Reddit's argument delves deeper: "Citizens under 16 could become voters in a few years or months. Political communication they encounter before turning 18 shapes their future choices." In other words, it could close the "gateway to political participation for minors." Reuters

Regarding (2), it targets the "vulnerabilities" in the regulatory design. eSafety's criteria are based on features like online interaction and posting capabilities, but Reddit emphasizes "knowledge sharing and topic-based communities," arguing that it differs in nature from SNSs centered on "friend relationships, real names, and real-time connections." The Guardian reports Reddit's view that the selection is "inconsistent," highlighting Reddit's focus on anonymity and lack of typical SNS features like friend requests and activity feeds. The Guardian

And (3)—this is where the situation has heated up. The law requires "reasonable measures," and potential implementations include "age inference" from behavioral history, "age estimation" using selfies, and possibly uploading identification documents. Reddit criticizes these measures as "intrusive and potentially unsafe verification" for adults. Reuters

Government's Strong Rebuttal—"Standing with Parents and Children"

The Australian government's response is firm. According to Reuters, the responsible minister stated, "We stand with parents and children, not platforms," clearly taking a confrontational stance. Additionally, the health minister reportedly likened the resistance of large industries to regulation to "Big Tobacco." Reuters

The regulation is being watched as a "model case" beyond Australia. Reuters summarizes the trend of regulatory bodies worldwide observing Australia's implementation and considering similar age restrictions and consent requirements. Reuters

SNS Reactions: Polarized Opinions, but Common Concerns About "Operational Distortions"

Here's the main point. Due to the involvement of "law," "children," "freedom," "surveillance," and "loopholes," reactions on social media are sharply divided. Moreover, the division is not simply about approval or disapproval, but there's a gradient based on "sensitivity to side effects."

1) Teen Reactions: From "It's Over" to "I'll Find a Way Around It"

Immediately after the regulation's implementation, Reuters reported "farewell posts" on TikTok, while others openly declared their intention to "learn ways to circumvent it." In fact, a provocative comment was attached to the Prime Minister's TikTok, saying, "I'm still here, when I can vote..." In other words, **the regulation is prone to "gamification from day one."** Reuters

Additionally, the surge in interest in VPNs (methods to disguise the connection source) is symbolic. Reuters reported that VPN searches in Australia reached their highest level in about a decade before the regulation took effect. The atmosphere on social media leaned towards "finding ways around it." Reuters

2) Reactions on Reddit: "Create an Educational Mode" vs. "It's the Law of a Sovereign Nation"

In Reddit's investor community, there's a proposal for Reddit to comply while creating a "separate app for those under 16" with only educational subreddits like history, science, and languages, mixed with opposition to the regulation. Reddit

In Australian subreddits, privacy concerns are expressed, such as "government's 'nanny state' approach" and "I don't want to be forced to submit ID or selfies," while others argue, "There's no need to fight to protect US big tech," and "Those trying to stop the regulation should lose." Reddit

This conflict, which seems like a moral debate over "child protection or freedom," actually shares a common concern about **"where the side effects will manifest."**

3) Side Effects of "Loopholes": Migration to Small Apps and Spread of Surveillance

The stricter the regulation, the more users migrate to other places. Reuters and AP report on the trend of younger users moving to smaller apps (e.g., Lemon8, Yope) and the situation where authorities are encouraging self-assessment for these apps as well. Reuters

On social media, the typical concern emerges: "Ultimately, it might drive users to more lawless areas." In fact, discussions on Reddit prominently feature opinions like "the smaller and less regulated places are more dangerous." Reddit

On the other hand, authorities are aware of the issue that "requiring ID submission across the board is intrusive" and envision a flow where businesses implement a combination of diverse age verification methods. As a result, social media reactions tend to connect to the concern of "whether age verification for the sake of protecting children will become normalized for society as a whole." AP News

The Issue Is Not About "Winning or Losing," but "What Kind of Internet We Want"

This lawsuit offers insights into global platform policies beyond whether Reddit wins or loses.

• Definition Issue: Should "topic-based anonymous boards" like Reddit be included in SNS regulations (if included, where is the line drawn)? The Guardian

• Operational Issue: Who determines what constitutes "reasonable measures," and how do we handle accuracy and misjudgments (e.g., adults being blocked)? eSafety Commissioner

• Privacy Issue: As age verification becomes a social infrastructure, the risks of leaks, surveillance, and discrimination expand "in scope." Reuters

• Effectiveness Issue: How do we curb "whack-a-mole" scenarios like VPNs and migration to emerging apps? Reuters

Australia, while pioneering the "world's first full-scale implementation," also assumes the position of bearing the "world's first side effects." Reddit's lawsuit brings these pain points—political freedom, privacy, and definitional ambiguity—into the courtroom. Reuters

Conclusion: Can SNS Be Segmented by "Age"?

"Child safety" is a difficult banner to oppose. However, the means of "age-based gatekeeping" fundamentally alters the design philosophy of the internet. If age verification becomes commonplace for logging in, the possibilities of anonymity, serendipitous encounters, gateways to political participation for young people, and the "freedom from surveillance" may quietly shrink. Reuters

On the other hand, the reality of harassment, addiction, bullying, and radicalization that have occurred cannot be ignored, and there is a strong voice that leaving them unaddressed is also irresponsible. This is why reactions on social media continue to be divided—not as "for" or "against," but as a debate over "what level of intervention is acceptable." Reuters

The outcome of this trial will directly influence whether it encourages or deters "countries considering doing the same next" beyond Australia. The world is watching not just the verdict but also the blueprint of what kind of internet we choose. ##HTML