Australia’s push to protect teens online overlooks gaming addiction

A new BBC report explores the unintended gaps in Australia’s “world-first” social media ban for under-16s by focusing on an overlooked group: children and adults struggling with gaming disorder. Through personal stories and expert commentary, the BBC highlights how the boundaries between social media, gaming and emerging technologies like AI are increasingly blurred — and how regulation has failed to keep pace.

At the centre of the story is 15-year-old Sadmir Perviz, who now spends his Wednesday afternoons playing Dungeons & Dragons at Fiona Stanley Hospital in Perth. The hospital hosts Australia’s only publicly run gaming disorder clinic, which supports around 300 patients. For Sadmir, who once spent up to 10 hours a day gaming online, the shift to offline board games is transformative.

“It feels completely different,” he says. “You get to roll the dice instead of clicking a button. You can interact with people, so you actually know who's there rather than just being on a call with random people.”

The BBC uses Sadmir’s experience to illustrate a broader concern raised by psychiatrist Dr Daniela Vecchio, who established the clinic. Vecchio does not argue that gaming itself is harmful, but that its addictive design and close ties to social media create similar risks for young people — including exposure to harmful content, bullying and predatory behaviour. For this reason, she questions why gaming platforms were excluded from Australia’s under-16 social media ban. “It doesn't make much sense,” she says, adding: “Gaming and social media are so interconnected, it's very difficult to separate.”

Although the ban blocks accounts on platforms like Instagram and Snapchat, children can still access gaming-related platforms such as Roblox, Discord and Steam — spaces experts say often function as social networks in practice.

The BBC notes that both Roblox and Discord have faced allegations related to child safety and have introduced new age-checking measures, though critics argue these changes fall short.

The article also examines the long-term consequences of unregulated digital exposure through the story of Kevin Koo, a former gaming clinic patient. Reflecting on his youth, he says, “I was growing up in the wild west of internet usage so, there weren't any restrictions.”

His addiction to online gaming, later compounded by reliance on AI chatbots, led to severe mental health consequences. Vecchio likens such cases to substance abuse, noting that gaming disorder is now officially recognised by the World Health Organisation and affects an estimated 2.8% of Australian children.

The BBC further challenges the logic underpinning the legislation. Platforms were excluded not through a risk-based assessment but because gaming’s “primary purpose” is not defined as social interaction. Critics argue this definition ignores how children actually use these platforms. “It's incompetence, it's reactionary,” says Marcus Carter, professor at the University of Sydney, adding, “I just wish the government was trying to figure out how to help rather than put a band-aid on a bullet wound.”

Professor Tama Leaver echoes this sentiment, advocating for age-appropriate, nuanced regulation rather than blanket bans. While some games foster creativity and community, others expose children to adult content with little oversight.

Ultimately, the BBC frames the ban as an evolving experiment rather than a solution. As Communications Minister Anika Wells acknowledged, it “isn't a cure, it's a treatment plan.” For Dr Vecchio, however, the stakes are immediate: “[The legislation] is excluding platforms where children interact with many others and some of them can be people who harm them.”

As demand for treatment grows and clinics turn families away, the article suggests that Australia’s regulatory response may be arriving too late — and stopping too short.

By Tamilla Hasanova