Online gaming escaped Australia's social media ban - but critics say it's just as addictive

Wednesday afternoons have become a ritual for 15-year-old Sadmir Perviz. It's a circuitous route from home in Perth to the Fiona Stanley Hospital - but it's worth it, he says, to sit down for a game of Dungeons & Dragons with people he may not know but with whom he shares a great deal in common.

Sadmir and his board game companions are just some of the 300 patients at the gaming disorder clinic, Australia's only publicly-run institution of its type, helping patients wean themselves off excessive online gaming habits.

The room where they meet is a simple space in a faceless hospital but in the corner, there's a pile of boardgames on a chair. Jenga, Uno and Sushi Go are also popular choices at the informal group which is attended by both patients and clinicians.

It's a bit of a departure for the 15-year-old who until a couple of months ago preferred to play games with friends online for 10 hours a day.

"It feels completely different," says Sadmir. "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."

Dr Daniela Vecchio, the psychiatrist who set up the clinic, says that while gaming isn't bad in itself, it can become a problem - an addiction even.

Gaming platforms and social media pose similar risks for children: excessive time spent online, and potential exposure to predators, harmful content or bullying.

So she wonders why gaming platforms have not been included in Australia's "world-first" social media ban for under-16s.

The ban, which came into force on Wednesday, is supposed to prevent teens from having accounts on 10 social media platforms including Instagram, Snapchat and X. Children will still be able to access platforms like YouTube and TikTok, but without accounts.

For Vecchio, the omission of gaming platforms is odd.

"It doesn't make much sense," she says.

"Gaming and social media are so interconnected, it's very difficult to separate.

"The individual who plays games for excessive amounts of time also spends excessive amounts of time on social media platforms where they can see other gamers or can live stream gaming, so it's a way to connect."

Former gaming clinic patient Kevin Koo, 35, wonders whether a social media ban could have influenced the access he got at a younger age.

"I was growing up in the wild west of internet usage so, there weren't any restrictions," he says. "I got free rein on the internet basically. So I think that for me, the damage has already been done."

A former quantum finance intern interested in AI, Mr Koo lost his job just before the pandemic. Living in Sydney, he had no family nearby and no regular work. He says he lost confidence and ended up consumed by online gaming, likening his experience to substance abuse.

Dr Vecchio agrees with the comparison - if she had her way, she'd be tempted not just to expand the social media ban to gaming but to raise the age to 18.

Gaming disorder is also now recognised by the World Health Organisation as an official diagnosis and, according to a 2022 Macquarie University study, around 2.8% of Australian children are affected by it. Vecchio thinks the number at risk is higher.

The Australian government says its ban is about protecting kids from harmful content, cyberbullying, online grooming and "predatory algorithms" among other things – some or all of which could arguably be said to exist with gaming platforms.

The Australia Federal Police are among those who have warned chatrooms on these sites are hotbeds for radicalisation and child exploitation.

But, as the eSafety Commissioner said last month, the legislation enforcing the ban means platforms were not selected according to "safety, a harms or risk-based assessment".

Instead, platforms have been selected according to three criteria: whether the platform's sole or "significant purpose" is to enable online social interaction between two or more users; whether it allows users to interact with some or all other users; and whether it allows users to post.

Exceptions were made for gaming, for example, because its primary purpose is not social-media style interaction.

The law, say some experts, makes no sense.

"It's incompetence, it's reactionary," says Marcus Carter, professor of human-computer interaction at the University of Sydney.

"Social interaction is not a bad thing… There are a bunch of probably legitimate concerns about these big tech platforms and what they are affording children and what they are exposing them to so as a result we've said we are banning social media.

"I just wish the government was trying to figure out how to help rather than put a band-aid on a bullet wound," he says.

Tama Leaver, professor of internet studies at Curtin University and chief investigator at the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, also says the ban on social media is too blunt a tool – instead a more nuanced approach is needed, including towards gaming platforms.

"There is such a wide spectrum of gaming from incredibly positive, nurturing, fun, creative, expressive spaces - something like Minecraft comes to mind where it's had so many positive uses." However, platforms like Roblox are at the other end of the spectrum, he says.

"Roblox isn't a game. It's a series of enabling tools for other people to make games. And we know that some of the games that have been made that clearly feel like they're meant for adults have been accessed by very young people."

On Professor Leaver's desk at the university are three plushies with inbuilt ChatGPT inside them. On the box, it says they are suitable for three and above. This, he says, has also gone too far.

"I do think there needs to be age-appropriate regulation," he says, referring to young people going online. "I do think we're at a moment, and it's not just Australia, you look across the EU, there is huge appetite for all sorts of regulation."