Reddit is asking Australia's High Court to rule that it's not a social media platform and therefore should not have to comply with the under-16s social media account ban .
Author
- Luke Beck
Professor of Constitutional Law, Monash University
The US-based web forum's High Court case raises two issues. First, it raises the same constitutional implied freedom of political communication issue raised in a case commenced last month by two 15-year-olds , which the High Court will hear in February.
Second, it asks the High Court to rule that even if the legislation is valid, Reddit falls outside the legislation's scope.
So what platforms does the social media account ban apply to? And is Reddit really not a social media platform?
What the legislation says
The legislation requires "age-restricted social media platforms" to take reasonable steps to prevent Australians under 16 from having accounts. The law does not ban teenagers from using the internet or accessing social media platforms in logged-out mode.
The legislation says the ban applies to any electronic service that meets these key criteria:
- it has the sole purpose, or a significant purpose, of enabling online social interaction between two or more end-users
- it allows end-users to link to, or interact with, other end-users
- it allows end-users to post material on the service
- it has material which is accessible to, or delivered to, end-users in Australia.
The eSafety Commission's website provides a breakdown of what each of these criteria means and a flow chart to help companies work out whether their platforms are subject to the rules.
The eSafety Commission has published a list of platforms it thinks meet the criteria, including: Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube.
The eSafety Commission also has a list of platforms it thinks don't meet the criteria and so fall outside the scope of the law, including: Discord, GitHub, Google Classroom, LEGO Play, Messenger, Pinterest, Roblox, Steam and Steam Chat, WhatsApp and YouTube Kids.
Why does Reddit say it's not social media?
In documents filed in the High Court, Reddit says it does not satisfy the criterion of having a significant purpose of "enabling online social interaction".
Reddit claims that while it enables online interaction it does not enable online social interaction.
Reddit says that for an interaction to be social it has to happen "because of a particular user's relationship with or interest in another user as a person; indeed, in most cases the identity of a user on Reddit is not even known to other users".
Reddit says it merely "enables online interactions about the content that users post on the site. It facilitates knowledge sharing from one user to other users."
These are not strong arguments.
What Reddit is telling the High Court doesn't match its own public statements
Odds are the High Court is not going to be convinced by Reddit's "you can't be social with people you don't know or aren't interested in" argument.
The fact that lots of Reddit users don't know each other is irrelevant. The same is true of lots of users of Facebook, Instagram and TikTok.
The same is also true for lots of in-person social interactions. According to Reddit's logic, if you go to a nightclub by yourself and spend the night dancing with strangers you did not engage in social interaction.
Or if you go to a car enthusiasts' meetup and spend the day chatting with other car enthusiasts you've never met before about cars, that's not social interaction either. The interaction is merely about a shared interest and not an interest in each other as people.
If you go on Reddit (you don't need an account to read posts) you will see discussions of all sorts of topics that go beyond "knowledge sharing".
Reddit's corporate home page even contradicts what it's telling the High Court. Its home page says:
Reddit is home to thousands of communities, endless conversation, and authentic human connection. Whether you're into breaking news, sports, TV fan theories, or a never-ending stream of the internet's cutest animals, there's a community on Reddit for you.
Communities. Conversation. Human connection. That sounds suspiciously like social interaction.
The case might be helpful anyway
New laws often bring court cases clarifying the scope of the law. Both the eSafety Commission and other social media companies will be watching closely.
A ruling from the High Court (or any other court, if the High Court decides to send the case to a lower court) will help provide guidance to the eSafety Commission in enforcing the law.
It will also provide guidance to other social media platforms in working out whether they are subject to the new laws.
Luke Beck does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
