Online news and discussions platform Reddit has called on the High Court to review Australia’s social media age ban, arguing age restrictions have been incorrectly applied to the company.

Though the company confirmed last week it would comply with the ban, it has simultaneously asked the court to declare the SMMA is invalid.

A spokesperson told Information Age that Reddit had applied to have the Social Media Minimum Age Law (SMMA) reviewed in Australia’s High Court.

Short of achieving an ‘invalid’ ruling, Reddit has also sought costs and a declaration that it isn’t an “age-restricted social media platform” – meaning it wouldn’t be subject to the requirements of the ban.

When asked about the legal challenge, a government spokesperson said the Albanese government is “on the side of Australian parents and kids, not platforms”.

“We will stand firm to protect young Australians from experiencing harm on social media,” they said.

“This matter is before the courts, so it is not appropriate to comment further.”

High Court to determine if ban is fit for purpose

In its filing, Reddit essentially argued the ban was not “reasonably appropriate and adapted" to achieve its intended purpose of reducing the risk of harm to under-16s.

The company noted social media platforms were only obligated to restrict under-16s from having an account, while “vast amounts of content” would remain accessible without an account.

“In those circumstances, the Amendment Act will not provide significant protection from online harm for persons under the age of 16,” Reddit’s filing read.

“Indeed, a person under the age of 16 can be more easily protected from online harm if they have an account, being the very thing that is prohibited.”

Reddit also argued the legislation is invalid on the grounds that it “infringes the implied freedom of political communication”.

Reddit is arguing the legislation is invalid on the grounds that it “infringes the implied freedom of political communication”. Photo: Shutterstock

“This law has the unfortunate effect of forcing intrusive and potentially insecure verification processes on adults as well as minors, isolating teens from the ability to engage in age-appropriate community experiences – including political discussions – and creating an illogical patchwork of which platforms are included and which aren’t,” Reddit said in a statement.

Reddit and TikTok’s algorithms are worlds apart

One of the main justifications for the ban has been to protect kids from the addictive content algorithms deployed by social media platforms to keep users engaged.

Indeed, Communications Minister Anika Wells said earlier this year that while there is a place for social media, there is “not a place for predatory algorithms targeting children”.

A Reddit spokesperson told Information Age the platform was in fact not driven by opaque algorithms, but content was instead made visible largely depending on votes and engagement from real users.

Tama Leaver, professor of Internet Studies at Curtin University, agreed Reddit’s approach was “very different to the infinite scroll of TikTok or Instagram Reels or YouTube Shorts”.

“Most people experience Reddit as a series of structured discussion boards,” said Leaver.

“While there are algorithms at work on Reddit, they are more about sorting posts within a subreddit, and that's usually driven by human voting.

“In short, Reddit isn't driven by so-called 'toxic algorithms' in the way most other banned platforms are.”

Reddit’s spokesperson also asserted under-16s are not a substantial portion of its market, and the SMMA wasn’t built for platforms like Reddit.

An eSafety spokesperson told Information Age the commissioner was “now enforcing the [SMMA], consistent with the law of Australia”.

“Constitutional matters are for the High Court to decide,” they said.

Why is Reddit included in the ban?

Leaver said he did not believe Reddit would achieve its first aim of overturning the ban entirely, but it seemed “very likely” the company would successfully challenge its designation as a banned platform.

“Personally, I don't understand why Reddit is included, and I think their lawsuit seems to have a strong case,” he said.

Lisa Given, professor of Information Sciences at RMIT, said the “key question here is less about algorithms, and more about whether Reddit meets the definition of a social media platform” under the new legislation.

Indeed, Reddit’s court filing went as far to reference dictionary definitions of the word “social”.

“Reddit enables online interactions about the content that users post on the site. It facilitates knowledge sharing from one user to other users," read the filing.

“It is not a significant purpose of the site to enable interactions engaged in because of a particular user's relationship with or interest in another user as a person.

“In most cases the identity of a user on Reddit is not even known to other users."