Australia’s eSafety Commissioner steers a high-stakes social media experiment

Julie Inman Grant has transformed from a tech-industry insider into the visible enforcer of one of the world’s most assertive online-safety regimes. Charged with operationalizing a law that removes social network access for Australians under 16, she now negotiates compliance with household-name platforms while fending off legal, political and personal attacks. The legislation applies to ten major services and officially took effect on 10 December 2025, placing the eSafety Commission at the center of enforcement and dispute resolution. Implementation has been greeted warmly by many parents but criticised by clinicians and digital-rights advocates who argue education and inclusion deserve more emphasis than exclusion. Tech companies have publicly affirmed safety goals but have pushed back against the mechanics of a de facto ban, setting up a fraught relationship between regulators and platforms. The office has faced intense online backlash—an academic analysis recorded a sudden surge to 73,694 mentions on one platform during a single viral incident, compared with a low daily baseline—highlighting the reputational and safety risks regulators now shoulder. Internally, the regulator has seen its funding multiply and its mandate and staffing expand substantially, creating a far larger operational footprint than when the role began. That growth has enabled legal actions and enforcement processes but also invited scrutiny from overseas lawmakers, including requests for testimony that Canberra has resisted. Litigation is already underway or expected: the regulator is defending the ban against at least two High Court challenges while pursuing companies for breaches of online-safety obligations. Inman Grant frames the policy as an attempt to delay early exposure while pairing the ban with digital-literacy initiatives, though critics counter that bans can deepen isolation for vulnerable groups who rely on online spaces. Looking ahead, she has signaled a pivot toward governing artificial intelligence and pushing safety-by-design into industry practices, arguing that lessons from social-media regulation should accelerate work on emergent systems. Her term is nearing its statutory end, but she indicates the mission to embed safety in technology will extend beyond her tenure, whether through domestic continuity or international advisory work. The result is a high-profile trial of regulatory muscle against global platforms, with outcomes likely to shape other countries’ approaches to child protection, platform accountability and the governance of new technologies.