Two Australian teenagers have taken their fight against the country's proposed social media ban on children to the High Court.
The law, which is set to come into effect next month, requires all major social media platforms - including Meta, TikTok and YouTube - to block users under 16 from creating accounts. However, 15-year-old Noah Jones and Macy Neyland claim that this ban infringes on their right to free communication.
Jones argued the government's policy was "lazy", saying: "We are the true digital natives and we want to remain educated, robust, and savvy in our digital world... They should protect kids with safeguards, not silence."
Macy Neyland expressed similar sentiments, stating: "We shouldn't be silenced. It's like Orwell's book 1984, and that scares me,"
The law is being backed by many Australians - but opponents claim it could push young people into more vulnerable corners of the internet.
In contrast to this opposition, Communications Minister Anika Wells said she would not be intimidated by legal challenges or "big tech".
While the case makes headlines around the world, many say the government's stance on digital literacy is flawed.
The law, which is set to come into effect next month, requires all major social media platforms - including Meta, TikTok and YouTube - to block users under 16 from creating accounts. However, 15-year-old Noah Jones and Macy Neyland claim that this ban infringes on their right to free communication.
Jones argued the government's policy was "lazy", saying: "We are the true digital natives and we want to remain educated, robust, and savvy in our digital world... They should protect kids with safeguards, not silence."
Macy Neyland expressed similar sentiments, stating: "We shouldn't be silenced. It's like Orwell's book 1984, and that scares me,"
The law is being backed by many Australians - but opponents claim it could push young people into more vulnerable corners of the internet.
In contrast to this opposition, Communications Minister Anika Wells said she would not be intimidated by legal challenges or "big tech".
While the case makes headlines around the world, many say the government's stance on digital literacy is flawed.
. The gov's trying to protect kids from themselves and regulate their online life, but really it's just another example of Big Brother lurking around every corner. I mean, are they saying that kids under 16 aren't capable of making responsible decisions about social media? It just seems like a knee-jerk reaction to the whole 'online safety' conversation. And what's with the arbitrary age limit anyway? Are we going to set another law limiting our freedoms as we get older? 
. I mean, it's not about being silenced, but about having a good balance between freedom and safety 
. Maybe they could just provide some guidelines or resources for parents to help their kids navigate the internet safely? That way, everyone wins 
.
And what about free speech? I get where they want to protect kids from online predators, but isn't that a good reason for parents and educators to step up the game instead of taking away our rights? 
. Its like, we're already teaching kids how to use the internet and navigate its dangers - why do we need the government to step in? 
. I'm all for keeping kids safe online, but this law feels like a blanket ban that's just gonna push them into some dark corners instead of giving 'em actual protection 
. We need to have a conversation about digital literacy and how we can educate our youth on how to stay safe online without stifling their freedom 
I think its so cool that these two teens are fighting for what they believe in! They're right, we should be protected online but also given the freedom to learn and explore. Its not about being reckless, its about teaching us how to navigate the online world safely 
. They're literally trying to protect themselves from a law that's just gonna push them into more trouble online 
. I mean, I get it, they want to be able to express themselves freely online, but shouldn't they also know how to protect themselves from all the crazy stuff out there? 
. What if it ends up being even more problematic in the long run? 
Also, isn't Australia already like super strict with online safety or what? 
... It's like, they're saying "we'll just make it harder for you to access social media" but really we should be teaching our kids how to navigate online safely and responsibly 
. Anyways, I guess only time will tell what the High Court decides! 
. My nephew is 15 and already knows way more about social media than most adults! So, let's give these teens some credit - they're speaking out against something that might not even be that effective in the long run 
like a mini netizen community where adults moderate and make sure they dont stumble upon anything bad... its not about being completely shielded from the internet, but more about having some protection so we can all feel comfy when our teens are online 
. I get why they wanna fight this law, but at the same time, like, isn't it a good idea to shield young minds from all that drama and cyberbullying 
. We need to give young people the tools to make informed decisions about their online lives, not just hand them a blanket ban 
They're not just some kids who don't know any better, they're actually using their skills to make a point about how this law could affect them in the long run 
It's like, we're already online, might as well be able to make a choice about who we interact with 
The internet can be a wild place, but it's also where we learn and grow. I think the gov't should be teaching kids how to navigate online safely, not shutting them down completely. And Anika Wells is being super extra by saying she won't back down... more like, let the teens have their say!