Australia’s under-16 social media ban is kicking off in just over a month, with Reddit and Kick set to go dark alongside the likes of Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X and YouTube on December 10.

But weeks before implementation, the government is still figuring out which platforms qualify under its own definitions, while insisting their assessments followed “rigorous” processes. And in a Wednesday morning press conference, eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant made a startling admission: platforms weren’t assessed based on the harms they pose to children.

“This is not a safety, a harms or risk-based assessment,” Inman Grant told reporters. “These were criteria for assessment contained in the legislative rules.”

Communications Minister Anika Wells (left) and eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant during a press conference at Parliament House in Canberra on Wednesday. Photo: Alex EllinghausenCredit: Alex Ellinghausen

It’s a remarkable concession. Australia’s world-first ban isn’t blocking platforms because they’re dangerous: it’s blocking them based on whether their “sole or significant purpose” is social interaction. Meanwhile, Roblox, Discord, and Twitch remain exempt, despite documented safety concerns, and despite these platforms being precisely where millions of Australian kids are already hanging out and interacting.

The line between “gaming” and “socialising” disappeared years ago.

Kids don’t neatly separate their Roblox chats from their Instagram or Twitch streams.

Roblox, Discord, and Twitch won’t face the December 10 ban, despite Inman Grant writing to all three in September to assess compliance.

The message is call yourself a gaming platform and you’re essentially exempt, even if kids use your social features identically to Instagram.

Roblox, Discord, and Twitch have virtually identical........

© The Sydney Morning Herald