In a move that could be seen as declaring itself not like other social platforms, Reddit is arguing it should not be classified as a social media site. The company is seeking to overturn a new Australian law that bans children under 16 from social media.
Reddit has filed a lawsuit with Australia’s top court. The company argues the law, which took effect on December 10, limits free political discourse by preventing children from expressing their views online and should be overturned. If the legislation is not overturned, Reddit contends it should be exempt because it does not meet the law’s definition of a “social media platform.”
The lawsuit asks the Australian High Court to address questions raised about the legislation. The law requires ten major services to deactivate accounts for users under 16 and prevent them from using their apps. Critics argue it infringes on children’s rights, and companies have questioned how “social media” is even defined.
In its filing, Reddit calls itself a “collection of public fora arranged by subject.” It references definitions of the word “social” to argue that enabling social interaction is not a sole or significant purpose of Reddit. The filing states that Reddit enables online interactions about posted content and facilitates knowledge sharing between users. It argues the site is significantly different from other platforms where users become friends, post personal photos, or organize events.
In a public post accompanying the filing, a Reddit administrator said the law carries serious privacy and political expression issues for everyone on the internet. The post stated that while protecting people under 16 is important, this law forces intrusive and potentially insecure verification processes on adults as well as minors. It also isolates teens from age-appropriate community experiences, including political discussions, and creates an illogical patchwork of which platforms are included.
Reddit further points out that a significant portion of content on social platforms is accessible without an account. The company suggests children under 16 could be more easily protected if they were allowed to have accounts that could then be properly restricted.