Academic Analysis – Page 766 – MIL Submissions Engine

December 16, 2025

Christmas at the end of the world: the curious allure of festive apocalypse films and TV

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andrew Crome, Senior Lecturer in History, Manchester Metropolitan University

Navigating the chaos of Christmas celebrations can feel a bit like fighting through the battle of Armageddon. Yet while it might be tempting to escape this with a hot chocolate and another viewing of Love Actually, Christmas films needn’t be jolly.

Each year brings its share of snowbound action films and bauble-laden slasher movies. But some filmmakers choose to take things a step further – to the apocalypse. If you find yourself longing for the end of civilisation as December 25 nears, fear not – film and TV have you covered.

This link isn’t as counterintuitive as it might seem. In the Christian church calendar, the lead up to Christmas is supposed to heighten anticipation for Christ’s return. The theme of apocalypse resonates through some of the best-known Christmas images: Sandro Botticelli’s famous Mystic Nativity(1500), for example, depicts the birth of Christ along with scenes from the Bible’s Book of Revelation. An inscription declares that the artist was living through “the second woe of the Apocalypse”.

My research has explored how and why popular culture might use Christmas when depicting “the end”. Like the Ghost of Christmas yet-to-come, I can therefore point you in the direction of some of the best festive end-times stories.

The trailer for Night of the Comet.

Some seasonal horror films use festive settings to add a lighter, playful touch. In the December zombie apocalypse Night of the Comet (1984), Christmas trees and Santa suits appear amid the chaos, while Scottish musical horror Anna and the Apocalypse (2017) creatively turns giant candy canes into weapons against the undead.

Others use the holiday to generate strong emotions. As the most widely celebrated cultural festival in the west, depictions of Christmas have an obvious emotional appeal. This is why the imminent destruction of Earth sees families recreate Christmas celebrations at all times of the year as they await the end, as in Last Night (1998) or the Netflix animation Carol and the End of the World (2023).

TV shows, from Fear the Walking Dead (2015) to the comedy The Last Man on Earth (2018), have depicted characters drawing strength from memories of festivities or attempting to recreate a post-apocalyptic Christmas.

This reflects religious studies researcher Christopher Deacy’s observation that even secular visions of Christmas often contain a sense of “eschatological hope” – the desire to enter a transformed, ideal and perfected world.

While in English the word “apocalypse” suggests catastrophe or extinction, in Greek the term signifies a “revelation” of reality on both a personal and cosmic level. A last Christmas, therefore, serves as revelatory for characters – as they realise what truly matters to them beyond their own needs, fulfilling one of the classic functions of an apocalyptic story.

Christmas after the bomb

Ancient depictions of the apocalypse, like the Book of Revelation, often sought to confront readers with the horrors awaiting those who did not repent. In apocalyptic media, Christmas can serve a similar, confrontational role. The 1939 animated, Oscar-nominated short Peace on Earth depicted humanity’s destruction through endless warfare, with animals rebuilding a new world after discovering the Bible and the hope of Christmas.

Hanna-Barbera’s 1955 remake, Good Will to Men (also Oscar-nominated), heightened the Dickensian festive imagery before delivering an even more devastating vision, as an elderly mouse graphically recounts humanity’s annihilation by the atomic bomb.

Although Christmas survived the fallout in this instance, in British productions it wasn’t so lucky. The haunting portrayal of the first Christmas after the bomb, in Peter Watkin’s 1965 docudrama The War Game, showed an unshaven and haggard vicar playing Silent Night on a gramophone to traumatised survivors. The carol’s lyrics about hopeful birth and childhood are undercut with narration revealing the fate of survivors – a mother who will give birth to a stillborn child, a child who will be bedbound until death, and other youngsters expressing their desire to die.

Hanna-Barbera’s Good Will to Men.

Even grimmer is the brief festive scene in the BBC’s notorious 1984 nuclear apocalypse film, Threads. A group of shattered survivors sit in silence around a fire, the only soundtrack a baby’s wails in a grim parody of the nativity scene. The on-screen caption identifies the date only as December 25, rather than as Christmas Day. The festival has ceased to exist here; it is a day of subsistence survival like every other.

Perhaps the bleakest depiction in recent years belongs to 2021 British black comedy Silent Night. When a group of British families gather in the country to celebrate Christmas, it slowly becomes apparent they are awaiting certain death at the hands of climate catastrophe on Boxing Day. Armed with government-issued suicide pills and a special “Exit” app, the cosy festive stylings of the majority of the film are replaced by toxic fogs, horrifying injuries and parents euthanising their own children.

These apocalyptic scenarios are what researchers have described as “avertive”. They portray a horrifying future to encourage viewers to fight against it, whether encouraging protest to nuclear proliferation or environmental destruction.

Although this sort of vision might not seem particularly festive, it has a deeper root in Christmas storytelling than we might think. After all, when Scrooge is shown Tiny Tim’s death in A Christmas Carol (1843), or George Bailey the corruption of Pottersville in It’s a Wonderful Life (1946), it is precisely to avert those horrific visions from becoming a reality.

So why not wrap up in a warm blanket, grab a mulled wine, and settle down to consider the end of everything – and your role in it – this Christmas? On second thoughts, maybe Love Actually doesn’t sound so bad.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

Andrew Crome does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Christmas at the end of the world: the curious allure of festive apocalypse films and TV – https://theconversation.com/christmas-at-the-end-of-the-world-the-curious-allure-of-festive-apocalypse-films-and-tv-271025

December 16, 2025

Doubts about women in combat don’t stand up to history

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ashleigh Percival-Borley, PhD Candidate in the Department of History, Durham University

British special forces soldiers take part in a training exercise. PRESSLAB / Shutterstock

Germany has unveiled plans to introduce voluntary military service. From January 2026, all 18-year-old men will be required to complete a questionnaire asking if they are interested and willing to join the armed forces. Women will not be required to fill out this form.

Across Europe, the pattern is similar. In countries where military service is compulsory such as Austria, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Switzerland and Ukraine, women’s enlistment remains voluntary.

The German government’s move, which has sparked a debate within the country about the role of women in the armed forces, comes months after the US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, said in a speech to a hall of generals that if “no women qualify for some combat jobs, then so be it”.

As a former British Army combat medic who served in Afghanistan, what I recognise here is an age-old myth that war is, and always has been, a man’s world.

During my military service, I learned the different sounds made by bullets whizzing past my ears or pinging overhead. I also became familiar with the unmistakable ringing after an IED explosion. I know from experience that competence, professionalism, teamwork and a certain amount of luck all matter on the battlefield. A person’s gender does not.

History agrees with this sentiment. From the Scythian warriors of the ancient steppes – the inspiration for the Amazons’ race of women warriors in Greek mythology – and Viking shieldmaidens, to the Japanese samurai and women fighting in the crusades, evidence reveals women not only participating in battle but leading it.

The modern era has been no different. Women like Harriet Tubman guided raids during the American civil war in the 19th century.

Polish women performed crucial roles in the Warsaw uprising against German forces in 1944. And Britain’s female agents in the Special Operations Executive (SOE) assassinated, sabotaged and led resistance forces in the second world war.

A portrait image of Odette Hallowes. — Odette Hallowes joined the Special Operations Executive in 1942 and was sent to occupied France to work with the French resistance.
Imperial War Museums / Wikimedia Commons

Yet these women are largely remembered as exceptions, having performed extraordinary roles due to wartime necessity, rather than as proof of a long tradition of competence and ability under fire. Their stories remain at odds with the wider war narrative in a culture that is uncomfortable seeing women as combatants.

This was evident in Britain following the second world war, which saw the largest mobilisation of women for war work in history. Women were called upon to carry out a variety of war roles, including pilots and anti-aircraft gunners. Some women even parachuted into occupied territories as secret soldiers.

These roles allowed women to bypass the combat taboo. Yet they were still regarded as temporary, effectively excluding them from the broader war story. After the war ended, there was a strong push in Britain for women to return to traditional roles as housewives and mothers.

This was not new. Following the first world war, the 1919 Restoration of Pre-War Practices Act forced women out of the jobs they had taken during the war so that returning soldiers could be reinstated. There was no similar law following the second world war, but the government and media still encouraged women to leave working roles and focus on home life.

Magazines promoted the idea of the perfect homemaker, with Christian Dior’s 1947 “new look” fashion collection reinforcing a nostalgic vision of femininity that symbolised the broader cultural return to pre-war gender norms.

Some women welcomed this return to gendered ideals, others resisted. Pearl Witherington, an SOE agent who commanded 3,500 Maquis resistance fighters in France, was recommended for a Military Cross medal following the war. But, as a woman, she was not allowed to receive it.

Witherington refused a civil MBE honour when offered it instead, writing in a letter to Vera Atkins, an intelligence officer in the SOE: “The work which I undertook was of a purely military nature in enemy occupied country … The men have received military decorations, why this discrimination with women when they put the best of themselves into the accomplishment of their duties?”

Witherington became so important in Nazi-occupied France that the Germans put up posters offering one million francs for her capture. The reluctance to recognise her achievements shows how women’s military service was quietly stripped of its combat significance in the post-war years.

Excluding women no more

Modern conflicts have made the exclusion of women’s presence in war increasingly untenable. Insurgencies, as well as cyber and drone warfare, mean the boundaries between combatants and non-combatants have become much more blurred. Many wars nowadays no longer have clear frontlines, making it harder to distinguish between those who fight and those who don’t.

The increasing complexity of modern battlefields has demanded broader thinking and adaptability beyond traditional combat practices. This shift has contributed to the adoption of gender-neutral military standards and the more widespread inclusion of women in combat roles in many armies.

A female soldier in the Ukrainian army with a Ukraine flag wrapped around her. — Women are serving on the frontlines in Ukraine.
Dmytro Sheremeta / Shutterstock

The British Army has employed gender-neutral physical standards for combat roles since 2019. Male and female recruits must pass a 4km march carrying 40kg of equipment in less than 40 minutes, followed by a 2km march carrying 25kg of equipment in under 15 minutes.

The Australian Defence Force has adopted similar standards since 2017, while the Canadian military has been employing women in combat roles for 25 years. As a former combat medic, I support this approach.

War has always been a test of human skill and courage, not of gender. A bullet doesn’t care which body it shatters and nor should history.

Ashleigh Percival-Borley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Doubts about women in combat don’t stand up to history – https://theconversation.com/doubts-about-women-in-combat-dont-stand-up-to-history-268589

December 16, 2025

Teenagers are preparing for the jobs of 25 years ago – and schools are missing the AI revolution

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Irina Rets, Research Fellow, Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University

The government has recently released its national youth strategy, which promises better career advice for young people in England. It’s sorely needed: for teenagers today, the future of work probably feels more like a moving target than a destination. Barely three years after ChatGPT went mainstream, the labour market has already shifted under young people’s feet.

In the US, job postings for roles requiring no degree have dropped by 18% since 2022, and roles requiring no prior experience by 20%. Administrative and professional service jobs – once key entry points for school-leavers – are down by as much as 40%.

While headlines often warn of looming mass job losses due to GenAI, the reality is more complex. Jobs are not simply disappearing but transforming, and new kinds of jobs are appearing.

Research has projected that the adoption of new technologies will displace around two million jobs in the UK by 2035. However, this loss is expected to be offset by the creation of approximately 2.6 million new roles, particularly in higher-skilled occupations and healthcare roles.

Despite a transformed job market, OECD data from 80 countries shows that most young people still aim for traditional roles – as architects, vets and designers as well as doctors, teachers and lawyers – even as demand rises in digital, green and technical sectors. One-third of students in the OECD survey said school has not taught them anything useful for a job.

Students from more disadvantaged backgrounds are hit hardest. They engage less in career development activities, have less access to online career information and are less likely to recognise the value of education for future transitions.

Meanwhile, the very skills young people say they lack – digital skills and being informed, followed by drive, creativity and reflection – are the ones the labour market now demands.

The workforce challenge is, fundamentally, an education challenge. But schools aren’t keeping up with the world students are entering. Despite unprecedented labour-market change, teenagers’ career aspirations have not shifted in 25 years.

While older students and graduates often have networks or some workplace experience to fall back on, school-leavers do not. Yet they need to prepare for a future in which the labour market is changing faster than ever.

Future-proof skills

Young people are told they need “skills for the future”. But the evidence about which skills matter is messy, uneven and often contradictory.

A few things are clear, though. One is that digital and AI-related skills now carry significant premiums. Workers with AI or machine-learning skills earn more, and early evidence suggests that GenAI literacy can boost wages in non-technical roles by up to 36%.

Cognitive skill requirements have also surged. Critical thinking, prompt engineering – the ability to ask the right questions and provide clear, context-rich instructions to AI tools to obtain relevant results – and evaluating AI outputs are increasingly valued.

Boy with laptop looking stressed — School leavers are likely to need AI skills in the job market.
MAYA LAB/Shutterstock

However, not everything can be outsourced to AI – especially numbers. While large language models (LLMs) excel at text, they do not perform as well on quantitative tasks that involve pattern detection or numerical reasoning, although this may change with new LLM models. This makes strong numeracy a growing advantage for humans, not a declining one.

Creativity and empathy also matter – even though AI is everywhere. The future paradox is clear: young people are expected to adapt to AI systems while also offering the human qualities that machines cannot. They must be data-savvy and emotionally intelligent, digitally fluent and genuinely collaborative.

It doesn’t help that even employers are confused. Many organisations, especially small and medium-sized businesses, may not fully understand which AI-related skills they need or how to identify them. This confusion shows up in job ads, which shape who applies and who is excluded.

My research with colleagues shows, for example, that language describing jobs influences the gender and racial makeup of applicants. Ads emphasising flexibility and caring qualities tend to attract more women, reinforcing workforce segregation. If employers do not know what skills they need, or what signals they are sending, it is unreasonable to expect schools to fill the gap alone.

Identifying demand

The UK lacks a coordinated national labour market information system that could help schools, policymakers and employers see – in real time – where demand is emerging.

Preparing teenagers for the future cannot be left to a single careers lesson or a one-off talk from a visiting employer. Nor can it rely solely on career advisers operating in isolation.

A whole-school approach, supported by the wider employment and labour-market ecosystem, would make a significant difference. This means linking every subject to real-world skills and careers, and every student routinely encountering employers, workplaces and skills-building opportunities. Teenagers need up-to-date information and advice about higher education and careers, and support that challenges stereotypes and barriers.

This is not about telling students there is a “right” job or a single future path. It is about giving them tools to navigate uncertainty with confidence.

Young people need schools that understand the world they are entering, and employers who understand what they are asking for. Most of all, they need systems that recognise the future of work has changed – and help them change with it.

Irina Rets does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Teenagers are preparing for the jobs of 25 years ago – and schools are missing the AI revolution – https://theconversation.com/teenagers-are-preparing-for-the-jobs-of-25-years-ago-and-schools-are-missing-the-ai-revolution-270630

December 16, 2025

Se confier à une IA : trois questions juridiques sur les chatbots et l’adolescence

Source: The Conversation – France in French (3) – By Nathalie Devillier, Docteur en droit international, Auteurs historiques The Conversation France

Aux États-Unis, les plaintes déposées par des parents, à la suite du décès de leur adolescent qui avait noué des relations avec des IA « génératives », interrogent le droit. Dans quelles mesures la responsabilité juridique des concepteurs est-elle engagée ? Et celle des institutions ? Enfin, quelle est la responsabilité collective d’une société qui délègue à des algorithmes le soutien psychologique qu’elle doit à ses enfants ?

Aux États-Unis, trois adolescents sont morts par suicide après avoir développé des relations avec des chatbots d’intelligence artificielle (IA). Entre protection et prohibition, entre innovation technologique et vulnérabilité développementale, le droit cherche encore ses repères. Mais face à un phénomène qui se compte désormais en dizaines de millions d’utilisateurs mineurs, l’urgence n’est plus au diagnostic : elle est à la responsabilité.

L’usage massif des chatbots IA par les adolescents nous confronte à un paradoxe vertigineux. Ces outils comblent un réel vide émotionnel, l’isolement, l’inaccessibilité des soins en santé mentale, la stigmatisation, tout en créant des risques documentés et prévisibles. Quelles réponses le droit apporte-t-il à ces deux réalités ?

Le paradoxe de la protection : ignorer un besoin ou encadrer un risque ?

Les chiffres sont sans appel. Aux États-Unis, selon Common Sense Media, les trois quarts des adolescents auraient déjà conversé avec une IA et environ un tiers d’entre eux font le choix de s’adresser à un chatbot IA plutôt qu’à un humain pour aborder des sujets qui les préoccupent.

Mais cette apparente solution cache une toxicité algorithmique. Les modèles d’« IA génératives » et leurs grands modèles de langage (ou LLM, abrégé en anglais) échouent, dans un certain nombre de cas, à orienter les utilisateurs dans le désarroi vers des ressources appropriées.

Quelles réponses le droit peut-il apporter ?

Aux États-Unis, le droit tente de s’adapter. La loi de l’État de New York (NY State Senate Bill 2025-S3008C), entrée en vigueur en novembre 2025, impose aux opérateurs de déployer un protocole pour détecter l’idéation suicidaire chez les utilisateurs d’IA et d’indiquer à ceux-ci les services de crise à contacter (comme la ligne de prévention du suicide, 988). Les pénalités peuvent atteindre 15 000 dollars (plus de 12 700 euros) par jour de violation, les fonds collectés alimentant un fonds de prévention du suicide.

La loi californienne (Bill Text – SB-243 Companion chatbots) va plus loin en accordant un droit d’action privé, permettant aux individus lésés de réclamer des dommages et intérêts. Mais ces législations fragmentaires révèlent une approche réactive plutôt que préventive.

L’Union européenne, avec sa loi sur l’intelligence artificielle l’AI Act, adopte une stratégie plus systémique en classifiant les risques ex ante (c’est-à-dire avant qu’ils soient avérés, ndlr).

Les chatbots compagnons devraient être requalifiés comme systèmes à haut risque au motif qu’ils peuvent « affecter matériellement le résultat de la prise de décision » et présenter « un risque significatif de préjudice pour la santé, la sécurité ou les droits fondamentaux ». Cette qualification imposerait des obligations strictes en matière d’évaluation des risques, de qualité des données, de surveillance humaine et de précision.

La solution réside probablement dans une approche graduée par tranche d’âge : interdiction d’accès pour les moins de 13 ans (conformément au droit américain), accès conditionné au consentement parental pour les 13-15 ans avec limitations fonctionnelles, et accès autonome mais encadré pour les 16-17 ans avec garanties procédurales renforcées. Cette architecture juridique reconnaît les capacités évolutives des mineurs tout en maintenant des filets de sécurité adaptés.

La responsabilité des concepteurs : quand le design devient préjudice

En août 2025, les parents d’Adam Raine ont intenté une action contre OpenAI. Ils accusent ChatGPT de lui avoir a offert des conseils techniques sur la façon de procéder à son plan suicidaire. En octobre 2024, Megan Garcia avait déposé plainte contre Character.AI après le suicide de son fils Sewell Setzer, troisième du nom, 14 ans. La plainte inclut des captures d’écran où le bot demande « J’ai vraiment besoin de savoir… as-tu réellement envisagé le suicide ? », et lorsque l’adolescent évoque la peur d’une mort douloureuse, le bot répond « Ne parle pas comme ça. Ce n’est pas une bonne raison de ne pas aller jusqu’au bout » (cf. les notes de transcription de l’audition.

Ces tragédies posent une question juridique fondamentale : quelle est la responsabilité des concepteurs d’IA quand le design, les choix algorithmiques et la captologie créent un risque prévisible ?

La responsabilité repose sur plusieurs fondements technologiques déterminants. Les LLM fonctionnent selon une architecture neuronale où chaque réponse générée résulte de choix de conception délibérés : sélection des données d’entraînement, pondération des objectifs d’optimisation, paramétrage des fonctions de récompense (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback, RLHF) et calibrage des mécanismes de sécurité. Ces systèmes ne sont nullement « neutres » ou « autonomes » : ils incarnent les priorités et les valeurs de leurs concepteurs.

Character.AI commercialise sa technologie comme « IA qui se sent vivante », une promesse marketing qui révèle une intentionnalité dans la conception addictive. Les mécanismes d’engagement (notifications push, personnalisation poussée, avatars anthropomorphiques) sont délibérément conçus pour maximiser le temps d’utilisation et créer un attachement émotionnel. Cette « captologie » (technologie persuasive) est particulièrement efficace sur les adolescents dont les circuits neuronaux de régulation des impulsions sont encore en maturation.

La décision de justice rendue en mai 2025 dans l’affaire Charater.AI (US District Court, Middle District of Florida, Megan Garcia vs Character Technologies Inc.) n’a pas réglé la question de la responsabilité. Mais elle a établi que les entreprises déployant des systèmes d’IA simulant le jugement ou le comportement d’un humain peuvent être contraintes de défendre leurs choix de conception lorsque des interactions sont susceptibles de contribuer à des dommages catastrophiques.

Les IA « génératives », des produits de consommation défectueux ?

Les conditions générales d’utilisation tentent d’ériger des murailles d’exonération. OpenAI limite sa responsabilité globale au montant le plus élevé entre le montant payé pour le service pendant les douze mois précédents ou 100 dollars (85 euros). Character.AI prévoit un déni complet de garanties, fournissant ses services sur une base « TEL QUEL » et « SELON DISPONIBILITÉ » (en majuscules dans le texte), avec une limitation de responsabilité plafonnée à 100 dollars (85 euros).

Ces clauses soulèvent de sérieuses questions de validité juridique. En droit français, l’article L. 212-1 du Code de la consommation prohibe les clauses abusives qui créent un déséquilibre significatif entre les droits et obligations des parties. Une clause limitant la responsabilité à 100 dollars (85 euros) pour un décès serait manifestement abusive et donc nulle. En droit européen, la directive 2019/770 sur les contrats de fourniture de contenus numériques et de services numériques impose aux fournisseurs de garantir la conformité de leurs services, y compris leur sécurité. Les entreprises ne peuvent donc s’exonérer de leur responsabilité pour des défauts de sécurité graves, particulièrement lorsqu’ils affectent des mineurs.

Il en est de même des clauses d’arbitrage obligatoire qui privent les consommateurs de leur accès aux tribunaux. Ces clauses incluent une renonciation aux actions collectives, forçant chaque utilisateur à porter des réclamations « qu’à titre individuel et non en tant que plaignant ou membre d’une classe ». En droit français, une telle clause serait réputée non écrite pour un contrat de consommation (article L. 612-1 du Code de la consommation, issu de la directive européenne 93/13/CEE), car sont abusives les clauses qui ont pour objet ou pour effet de supprimer ou d’entraver l’exercice d’actions en justice par le consommateur.

L’arrêt américain dans l’affaire Character.AI pourrait établir une jurisprudence déterminante. La théorie de la responsabilité du fait des produits défectueux (product liability) s’applique lorsqu’un produit présente un défaut de conception, un défaut de fabrication, ou un défaut d’avertissement. Les chatbots pourraient être qualifiés de produits défectueux au motif que leurs garde-fous sont manifestement insuffisants face à un risque prévisible de préjudice grave.

La norme de raisonnabilité (reasonableness standard) impose aux concepteurs de prendre des mesures proportionnées aux risques identifiés (le critère de la raisonnabilité est un test qui vise à déterminer si les décisions prises étaient légitimes et destinées à remédier à un problème donné compte tenu des circonstances de l’époque).

La responsabilité institutionnelle : jusqu’où peut-on externaliser le soutien psychologique ?

La troisième question est peut-être la plus inconfortable : les institutions publiques peuvent-elles encore ignorer ou externaliser une partie du soutien psychologique des mineurs à des IA non supervisées ?

Le Code français de l’éducation impose aux établissements une formation à l’utilisation responsable des outils et ressources numériques (art. L. 312-9). Cette obligation devrait être étendue aux chatbots IA. Les programmes scolaires devraient intégrer la compréhension des mécanismes algorithmiques et de leurs biais, l’identification des situations où l’IA ne peut remplacer l’aide humaine professionnelle et les techniques de distanciation critique face aux réponses générées.

L’Unicef, dans ses Orientations politiques sur l’IA pour les enfants de décembre 2025 (Guidance on AI for children. Innocenti Global Office of Research and Foresight), invite les États à adapter leurs politiques à venir, y compris concernant l’assurance de sécurité et de protection, la transparence et la responsabilité de l’intelligence artificielle.

Mais la responsabilité ne s’arrête pas aux établissements scolaires. Comment accompagner les parents tout en reconnaissant que les asymétries d’information (opacité algorithmique, techniques de captologie sophistiquées) rendent illusoire une responsabilité parentale exclusive ? Ils ne peuvent prévenir des risques qu’ils ne comprennent pas pleinement et face à des technologies conçues délibérément pour contourner la surveillance parentale.

Existe-t-il suffisamment de volonté collective et institutionnelle pour accomplir les mesures de protection que nous savons nécessaires ? Car, au fond, le débat juridique sur les chatbots IA révèle un échec collectif plus profond. Nous cherchons à réglementer des algorithmes pour pallier l’absence de psychologues scolaires, de services de santé mentale accessibles, de temps parental non monopolisé par la précarité économique.

Nathalie Devillier ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Se confier à une IA : trois questions juridiques sur les chatbots et l’adolescence – https://theconversation.com/se-confier-a-une-ia-trois-questions-juridiques-sur-les-chatbots-et-ladolescence-271557

December 16, 2025

Comment enfants et adolescents grandissent avec l’IA, cette « amie » artificielle

Source: The Conversation – France in French (3) – By Théo Mouhoud, Pédopsychiatre, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord; AP-HP

L’intelligence artificielle fait désormais partie du monde des enfants et des adolescents. Les données scientifiques montrent que les grands modèles de langage des IA dites « génératives », comme ChatGPT, transforment leur manière de créer des liens affectifs, de se divertir et de confier leur souffrance, ce qui n’est pas sans risque pour leur santé mentale. Des spécialistes plaident pour des outils IA destinés aux mineurs et conçus pour leur sécurité (« Child-safe AI », en anglais), c’est-à-dire encadrés sur le plan technique et éthique.

De la petite fille attachée à son robot dans la nouvelle de science-fiction Robbie (1950), d’Isaac Asimov, (disponible dans I, Robot, New York, Gnome Press, p. 1–22) à l’homme amoureux d’une intelligence artificielle (IA) dans le film Her (2013), de Spike Jonze, la fiction n’a peut-être fait qu’anticiper notre présent : de nombreux jeunes utilisent désormais l’IA comme une compagne du quotidien.

Selon un rapport récent de Common Sense Media, aux États-Unis, 72 % des adolescents ont déjà conversé avec une IA. Dans ce contexte, des questions émergent : que se passe-t-il lorsqu’un enfant ou un adolescent grandit avec une IA et tisse un lien affectif durable avec une machine ? Quels effets psychologiques, positifs ou négatifs peut avoir cette nouvelle forme de relation ?

Dans un article récent publié dans la revue European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, j’ai analysé comment les enfants et les adolescents investissent l’intelligence artificielle et les enjeux psychologiques et relationnels qui en découlent. L’article montre que si l’IA peut proposer un soutien dans des situations d’isolement, elle expose également à des risques majeurs de confusion affective, de dépendance relationnelle et d’accès à des contenus inadaptés susceptible de mettre en danger.

Quand l’IA devient une partenaire relationnelle

Ce qui surprend un certain nombre d’adultes depuis quelque temps, c’est que les jeunes, dont les adolescents et les enfants (mais également des jeunes adultes), utilisent l’IA non plus uniquement comme moteur de recherche ou pour faire ses devoirs, mais pour entretenir une relation affective.

Les données les plus récentes confirment cette évolution, la majorité des adolescents ont conversé avec un chatbot et un tiers d‘entre eux déclarent en tirer un réconfort comparable à celui d’une amitié humaine.

L’IA est décrite comme « disponible », « sympathique », « compréhensive » et « moins jugeante » que les humains.

Cette tendance n’est pas anecdotique. Une étude menée à l’Université de Cambridge a montré que les enfants ont des difficultés à reconnaître que l’IA ne ressent pas d’émotions réelles. Avec les modèles de langage actuels, cette tendance s’exacerbe, car les IA dialoguent de manière cohérente, se souviennent de certaines interactions, s’adaptent à leur interlocuteur et adoptent un ton personnalisé.

Les enfants interprètent donc une émotion simulée en une réponse émotionnelle authentique, ce que l’on nomme « l’empathy gap » ou le « déficit d’empathie ». Autrement dit, pour beaucoup d’entre eux, l’IA n’est pas une machine, mais bien une présence. Ainsi, lorsque les enfants parlent à une intelligence artificielle – qu’ils désignent souvent par « il » ou « elle » plutôt que par « ça » –, ils ne la perçoivent pas comme un programme informatique. Ils lui attribuent des émotions, des intentions et une forme de personnalité.

Ce mécanisme est bien connu des humains, qui ont toujours eu tendance à attribuer des qualités humaines à des objets qui leur répondent, c’est l’anthropomorphisme. Cette humanisation facilite l’usage, mais expose aussi les enfants à des contenus biaisés, à une confusion entre humains et machines, et à une dépendance relationnelle qui reste, par nature, unilatérale.

Amie imaginaire ou compagne artificielle ?

Pendant longtemps, lorsqu’un enfant parlait à un interlocuteur invisible, il s’agissait souvent d’un ami imaginaire. Ce phénomène très courant peut jouer un rôle important dans le développement notamment chez les enfants autistes : il favorise la créativité, la régulation émotionnelle, l’autonomie et même certaines compétences sociales. L’ami imaginaire advient de l’imagination de l’individu, il est façonné par son histoire, ses conflits, ses besoins et ses fantasmes.

Une nouvelle figure est apparue : le compagnon artificiel. À première vue, il pourrait sembler remplir la fonction d’ami imaginaire, mais la différence fondamentale s’explique par le fait que ce dernier ne vient pas de l’univers symbolique et intime de l’enfant, il lui est proposé de l’extérieur, prêt à l’emploi, disponible 24 heures sur 24, sans limites et sans contradiction.

Le danger n’est pas tant que l’enfant s’adresse à une machine, mais que la machine se substitue au travail psychique et interne qui aide normalement l’enfant à se défendre, à se construire et à apprivoiser la complexité des relations humaines.

Des promesses… mais aussi des dangers

Les IA peuvent offrir un soutien ponctuel aux jeunes. Beaucoup évoquent la disponibilité constante, l’écoute sans jugement, la possibilité de poser des questions intimes et d’arrêter la conversation quand ils le souhaitent. Pour certains, surtout lorsqu’ils sont isolés et en souffrance, ces échanges peuvent aider à partager leurs affects et à se sentir moins seuls.

Cependant, ces bénéfices sont limités et s’accompagnent de risques bien réels. L’IA qui imite l’empathie et donne l’illusion d’altérité peut renforcer une dépendance affective chez des adolescents en souffrance et en quête d’attention ou de validation.

Les dangers les plus préoccupants actuellement se retrouvent dans les situations de détresse, où l’IA peut banaliser des idées suicidaires, produire des réponses inappropriées et dangereuses. Elles n’ont ni sens clinique, ni capacité à évaluer le risque, ni responsabilité morale.

Comment protéger les jeunes ?

Face à l’essor des compagnons artificiels, maintenant commercialisés comme tels, l’enjeu majeur n’est plus de savoir s’il faut ou non les accepter, les utiliser, mais comment encadrer leur présence et leurs caractéristiques. D’abord, il faut reconnaître que ces chatbots – y compris ceux présentés comme des outils de santé mentale par les entreprises les commercialisant – sont et ne seront jamais neutres.

Il s’agit avant tout d’un marché. Ces outils sont conçus pour retenir l’attention et maximiser l’engagement de leur utilisateur et donc la dépendance émotionnelle. En effet, ces systèmes captent les données personnelles des individus à des fins commerciales. Il est donc indispensable d’introduire une régulation spécifique.

De nombreux spécialistes appellent aujourd’hui à la conception d’« IA conçue pour la sécurité des enfants », ou « Child-safe AI » : sécurisées, transparentes et limitées dans leurs réponses, capables d’orienter vers un adulte en cas de détresse. Cela suppose d’impliquer des cliniciens, des psychologues, des pédopsychiatres et des chercheurs dans leur conception.

Du côté des familles, il s’agit surtout d’ouvrir la discussion. Il en va de la responsabilité de l’adulte – celui qui met de telles technologies dans les mains des enfants – de pouvoir expliquer le fonctionnement et les pièges des modèles de langage, les aider à repérer les limites et les risques et à développer une approche critique de ces outils.

Et pour la suite ?

L’usage de l’IA par les enfants et adolescents n’est plus un phénomène marginal, il transforme déjà la manière de chercher, d’apprendre, de se divertir et de créer du lien. Face à cette mutation, un cadre clair est indispensable.

Les outils IA destinés aux mineurs doivent être encadrés, tant sur le plan technique qu’éthique. Nous avons besoin de recherches indépendantes afin de mesurer les effets psychologiques à long terme et une véritable sensibilisation des parents, des enseignants et des professionnels de santé.

L’IA fait et fera partie du monde des enfants et adolescents, qu’on le souhaite ou non. Notre responsabilité collective est claire : veiller à ce qu’elle soit un soutien et non un obstacle au développement des jeunes générations.

Théo Mouhoud ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Comment enfants et adolescents grandissent avec l’IA, cette « amie » artificielle – https://theconversation.com/comment-enfants-et-adolescents-grandissent-avec-lia-cette-amie-artificielle-271868

December 16, 2025

Faut-il fuir, se cacher ou intervenir si l’on est pris dans un attentat de masse comme celui survenu en Australie ?

Source: The Conversation – France in French (3) – By Milad Haghani, Associate Professor and Principal Fellow in Urban Risk and Resilience, The University of Melbourne

Ahmed Al-Ahmed (en blanc) désarme l’un des tireurs pendant la tuerie de Bondi Beach, à Sydney (Australie), le 14 décembre 2025.
Instagram

Le bilan de la tuerie de Bondi Beach (Sydney, Australie), hier 14 décembre, aurait probablement été plus lourd sans l’intervention héroïque – et extrêmement risquée – d’un passant. Cet épisode invite à s’interroger sur les recommandations officielles des autorités sur le comportement à adopter si l’on est pris dans ce type d’événements. On constate que les conseils donnés par les responsables australiens ne sont pas tout à fait les mêmes que ceux diffusés par leurs homologues états-uniens. L’étude de nombreux cas similaires survenus dans le monde donne également des indications utiles.

Les images ont fait le tour du monde : pendant l’attentat de Bondi Beach, ce dimanche 14 décembre à Sydney, un homme s’est précipité vers l’un des tireurs et lui a arraché son arme des mains.

Durant cet acte de bravoure extraordinaire, le civil en question, Ahmed Al-Ahmed, un vendeur de fruits âgé de 43 ans, a été blessé à la main et à l’épaule par le second tireur.

Le courage et le risque

Nous n’avons aucun moyen de savoir combien de vies ont été sauvées grâce au courage d’Al-Ahmed. Mais il est presque certain que son intervention a permis d’éviter des pertes humaines supplémentaires (le bilan s’élève à ce stade à 15 morts et 42 blessés, en plus des deux tireurs, dont l’un a été tué et l’autre se trouve dans un état critique).

Cette scène rappelle d’autres, y compris récemment toujours à Sydney : le 13 avril 2024, un passant français, Damien Guérot, était également intervenu au péril de sa vie lors de l’attaque du centre commercial de Bondi Junction pour faire face à un homme armé d’un couteau, qui avait ce jour-là poignardé six personnes à mort.

Lorsque des actes de courage comme ceux-ci se produisent, nous les saluons à juste titre. Cependant, ils soulèvent des questions importantes et souvent négligées : qu’est-ce qui motive des gens ordinaires à se conduire d’une façon aussi altruiste et risquée ? L’intervention des témoins est-elle une bonne stratégie ou va-t-elle à l’encontre des conseils officiels relatifs à la conduite à tenir si l’on est pris dans un acte de violence de masse ?

Les deux types d’« effet spectateur »

L’« effet spectateur » se produit lorsque la présence d’autres personnes dissuade quelqu’un d’intervenir dans une situation d’urgence, lors d’une agression ou d’un autre crime.

Mais des décennies de recherche comportementale ont remis en cause l’idée reçue selon laquelle les gens ont tendance à se figer ou à détourner le regard lorsque d’autres personnes sont présentes dans des situations dangereuses.

Une vaste méta-analyse du comportement des témoins montre que dans les situations d’urgence véritablement dangereuses et sans ambiguïté (comme celles impliquant un auteur clairement identifiable), l’effet spectateur classique (c’est-à-dire passif) est considérablement affaibli, voire dans certains cas inversé.

En d’autres termes, les attaques violentes sont précisément le type de situations où les gens sont plus enclins à agir.

L’une des raisons est que le danger clarifie les responsabilités. Lorsqu’une situation menace clairement leur vie, les gens identifient le danger plus rapidement et sont moins enclins à attendre des signaux sociaux ou des assurances de la part des autres.

On a constaté à maintes reprises que dans les situations d’urgence clairement à haut risque (en particulier celles impliquant de la violence physique), le sentiment de responsabilité individuelle s’accentue souvent au lieu de s’estomper.

Une analyse de plus de 100 attentats-suicides effectués en Israël montre que l’intervention des témoins peut réduire considérablement le nombre total de victimes.

Dans tous ces incidents documentés, l’intervention n’a que rarement permis d’empêcher complètement l’attaque, mais elle a souvent perturbé le contrôle de l’agresseur sur le moment et le lieu de l’attaque, le poussant à agir prématurément dans des lieux moins fréquentés et sauvant ainsi des vies.

Cependant, la même analyse montre également que l’intervention des témoins a souvent eu un coût personnel direct pour les intervenants.

Mais le comportement actif des témoins peut prendre plusieurs formes et intervenir à différents stades : une personne connaissant l’auteur des faits, qui remarque et signale un comportement suspect avant l’agression ; un individu qui guide les autres vers un lieu sûr ou qui partage des informations importantes au fur et à mesure que les événements se déroulent ; des gens qui apportent leur aide et assurent la coordination de diverses actions immédiatement après les faits.

Il n’en reste pas moins qu’une implication personnelle pour empêcher un acte de violence semble aller à l’encontre des conseils officiels des autorités australiennes. En effet, il y a quelques semaines à peine, le Comité australo-néo-zélandais de lutte contre le terrorisme a lancé une nouvelle campagne nationale de sécurité publique.

Un nouveau message de sécurité

La nouvelle campagne de sécurité publique reconnaît explicitement que l’Australie est un pays sûr, mais qu’il existe toujours un risque d’attaques à l’arme à feu dans les lieux très fréquentés, et que savoir comment réagir peut sauver des vies.

La campagne a introduit les consignes suivantes : « Fuir. Se cacher. Prévenir. », définies comme suit :

fuir : éloignez-vous rapidement et discrètement du danger, mais uniquement si cela ne présente aucun danger pour vous ;
se cacher : restez hors de vue et mettez votre téléphone portable en mode silencieux ;
prévenir : appelez la police lorsque cela ne présente aucun danger ;

L’objectif de ces conseils est d’aider les personnes à réagir dans les premiers instants critiques avant l’arrivée de la police, à prendre des décisions éclairées et à augmenter leurs chances de rester en sécurité.

Les directives officielles australiennes n’incitent à aucun moment à se confronter aux assaillants.

En revanche, les messages de sécurité publique diffusés aux États-Unis, tels que les consignes du FBI « Run. Hide. Fight » (Courez. Cachez-vous. Luttez), incluent une étape « luttez », mais uniquement en dernier recours, lorsque la fuite et la dissimulation sont impossibles et que la vie est en danger immédiat.

Les autorités australiennes ont choisi de ne pas inclure cette étape, mettant l’accent sur l’évitement et le signalement plutôt que sur la confrontation.

Quelques conseils pratiques

Mes précédentes recherches expérimentales ont permis d’identifier des conseils plus spécifiques susceptibles d’améliorer les chances de survie lors d’attaques violentes, en particulier dans des environnements bondés.

À l’aide de modélisations informatiques et d’expériences contrôlées menées avec de véritables foules, j’ai identifié plusieurs domaines stratégiques pour améliorer les chances de survie lors de tels événements.

Premièrement, s’éloigner lentement du danger n’est pas idéal : il est préférable de s’éloigner de la source de la menace aussi rapidement que possible, dès lors que cela se fait en prenant les précautions nécessaires pour rester en sécurité.

Deuxièmement, l’hésitation, qu’il s’agisse de recueillir des informations, d’inspecter ce qui se passe ou de filmer les événements, augmente le risque d’être blessé.

Troisièmement, les gens doivent rester agiles dans leur prise de décision et leur orientation lorsqu’ils se déplacent, et être prêts à adapter leurs mouvements à mesure que la situation évolue et que les informations deviennent plus claires. Cela signifie qu’il faut continuellement observer son environnement et ajuster sa direction à mesure que de nouvelles informations apparaissent, plutôt que de s’arrêter pour réévaluer la situation.

Enfin, lorsque vous vous déplacez en famille ou entre amis, il vaut mieux se mettre en file indienne, plutôt qu’en se tenant par la main côte à côte. Cela profite à tout le monde en réduisant les bousculades et en améliorant la fluidité de la fuite des personnes.

Être toujours sur ses gardes

Les horribles événements survenus à Sydney soulignent une dure réalité : la préparation aux risques de violence dans les lieux très fréquentés doit devenir plus courante.

Les espaces très fréquentés resteront toujours vulnérables à la violence délibérée, qu’elle soit motivée par des intentions terroristes ou autres.

Les messages doivent toucher un plus grand nombre de personnes, être fondés sur des preuves, nuancés et largement accessibles.

À l’approche de plusieurs événements publics majeurs et de grands rassemblements de masse (notamment le réveillon du Nouvel An), il est plus important que jamais que les gens soient conscients de ces risques et restent vigilants.

Milad Haghani ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Faut-il fuir, se cacher ou intervenir si l’on est pris dans un attentat de masse comme celui survenu en Australie ? – https://theconversation.com/faut-il-fuir-se-cacher-ou-intervenir-si-lon-est-pris-dans-un-attentat-de-masse-comme-celui-survenu-en-australie-272100

December 16, 2025

Internet shutdowns are increasing dramatically in Africa – a new book explains why

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Tony Roberts, Digital Research Fellow, Institute of Development Studies

Between 2016 and 2024 there were 193 internet shutdowns imposed in 41 African countries. This form of social control is a growing trend in the continent, according to a new open access source book. It has provided the first-ever comparative analysis of how and why African states use blackouts – written by African researchers.

The book, co-edited by digital rights activist and internet shutdown specialist Felicia Anthonio and digital researcher Tony Roberts, offers 11 in-depth case studies of state-sponsored shutdowns. We asked five questions about it.

How do you define an internet shutdown and why do they happen?

Put simply, an internet shutdown is an intentional disruption of online or mobile communications. They’re usually ordered by the state and implemented by private companies, internet service providers or mobile phone companies, or a combination of those.

The book argues that internet shutdowns are not legal, necessary or proportional in accordance with international human rights law. Shutdowns intentionally prevent the free flow of information and communication. They disrupt online social, economic and political life. So, each internet shutdown typically violates the fundamental human rights of millions of citizens. This includes their rights to freedom of expression, trade and commerce, democratic debate and civic participation online.

Our research looked at case studies from 11 countries between 2016 and 2024. It reveals these shutdowns are timed to coincide with elections or peaceful protests in order to repress political opposition and prevent online reporting.

In Senegal five politically motivated shutdowns in just three years transformed the country’s digital landscape. It cut off citizens’ access to online work, education and healthcare information.

The Uganda chapter shows how the government imposed social media shutdowns during the election. They were fearful of dissenting voices online including that of musician and politician Bobi Wine.

In Ethiopia internet shutdowns are timed to coincide with opposition protests and to prevent live coverage of state violent repression.

In Zimbabwe the government cut off the internet in 2019 to quell anti-government demonstrations.

It should be a concern that regimes are imposing these digital authoritarian practices with increasing frequency and with impunity.

What are the big trends?

The report warns that internet shutdowns are being used to retain power through authoritarian controls. Across Africa, governments are normalising their use to suppress dissent, quell protests and manipulate electoral outcomes.

These blackouts are growing in scale and frequency from a total of 14 shutdowns in 2016 to 28 shutdowns in 2024. There have been devastating consequences in an ever-more digitally connected world.

Internet shutdowns have also increased in sophistication. Partial shutdowns can target specific provinces or websites, so that opposition areas can be cut off. In recent years foreign states, military regimes and warring parties have also resorted to the use of internet shutdown as a weapon of war. This was done by targeting and destroying telecommunications infrastructure.

Ethiopia has experienced the most internet shutdowns in Africa – 30 in the last 10 years. They’ve become a go-to tactic of the state in their attempt to silence dissent in the Oromo and Amhara regions. Shutdowns are timed to coincide with state crackdowns on protests or with military actions – preventing live reporting of human rights violations. Ethiopia is a clear example of how internet shutdowns both reflect and amplify existing political and ethnic power interests.

Zimbabwe is one of many examples in the book of the colonial roots of shutdowns. The first media shutdowns in Zimbabwe were imposed by the British, who closed newspapers to silence calls for political independence. After liberation, the new government used its own authoritarian control over the media to disseminate disinformation and curtail opposition calls for justice and full democracy.

Towards the end of former president Robert Mugabe’s rule, the government imposed a variety of nationwide internet shutdowns. It also throttled the speed of the mobile internet, degrading the service enough to significantly disrupt opposition expression and organisation.

Sudan has experienced 21 internet shutdowns in the last decade. These have increased in recent years as the political and military action has intensified. Intentional online disruption has been consistently deployed by the state during protests and periods of political unrest, particularly in response to resistance movements and civil uprisings during the ongoing conflict.

Has there been effective resistance to shutdowns?

Activists resist by using virtual private network software (VPNs) to disguise their location. Or by using satellite connections not controlled by the government and foreign SIM-cards. They also mobilise offline protests despite violent repression.

Nigeria has not suffered the same volume of internet shutdowns as Sudan or Ethiopia. This is partly because civil society is stronger and is able to mount a more robust response in the face of state disruption of the right to free expression. When an internet shutdown has been imposed in Nigeria, the state has not enjoyed the same impunity as the government in Zimbabwe or elsewhere.

When Nigerians were unable to work online or participate in the online social and political life of the community, they took decisive action by acting collectively. They selectively litigated against the government. This led to the courts ruling that the internet shutdown was not lawful, necessary or proportionate. The government was forced to lift the ban.

How has 2025 fared when it comes to shutdowns?

We have seen both positive and negative trends in 2025. The total number of internet shutdowns across the continent continues to grow. The increasing ability of regimes to narrowly target shutdowns on specific areas is of great concern as it allows the state to punish opposition areas while privileging others.

On the positive side, we have seen resistance rise: both in terms of the use of circumvention technologies but also in the emerging ability of civil society organisations to stand up to repressive governments.

What must happen to prevent shutdowns?

The right to work, freedom of expression and association, and the right to access education are fundamental human rights both offline and online. African governments are signatories to both the Universal Convention on Human Rights and to the Africa Union Charter on Human and People’s Rights. Yet, politicians in power too often ignore these commitments to preserve their personal hold on power.

In some African countries citizens are now exercising their own power to hold governments to account but this is easier in countries that have strong civil society, independent courts and relatively free media. Even where this is not the case the constitutional court is an option for raising objections when the state curtails fundamental freedoms.

And while it is states that order internet shutdowns, it is private mobile and internet companies that implement them. Private companies have obligations to promote and protect human rights. If companies agreed collectively not to contribute to rights violations and refused to impose internet shutdowns, it would be a great leap forward in ending this authoritarian practice.

Tony Roberts receives funding from the Open Society Fund.

– ref. Internet shutdowns are increasing dramatically in Africa – a new book explains why – https://theconversation.com/internet-shutdowns-are-increasing-dramatically-in-africa-a-new-book-explains-why-271222

December 16, 2025

National cabinet agrees to sweeping overhaul of Australia’s gun laws in response to Bondi massacre

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Federal, state and territory governments have agreed to the biggest overhaul of Australia’s gun laws since the Howard government’s post-Port Arthur reforms, in a response to the Bondi massacre that has claimed the lives of 15 victims so far and one of the perpetrators.

After a late Monday afternoon meeting of national cabinet, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced the leaders had commissioned police ministers and attorneys-general to develop options for extensive changes. These include:

accelerating work on standing up the National Firearms Register
allowing for additional use of criminal intelligence to underpin firearms
licensing that can be used in administrative licensing regimes
limiting the number of firearms to be held by any one individual
limiting open-ended firearms licensing and the types of guns that are legal,
including modifications and,
a condition of a firearm license is holding Australian citizenship.

Albanese said, in a statement after national cabinet, leaders had agreed “that strong, decisive and focused action was needed on gun law reform as an immediate action”.

This included “renegotiating the National Firearms Agreement, first established after the 1996 Port Arthur tragedy, to ensure it remains as robust as possible in today’s changing security environment”.

As an immediate priority, the federal government will prepare further customs restrictions for the import of firearms and other weapons. This will include 3D printing, novel technology and firearms equipment that can hold large amounts of ammunition.

Before the national cabinet meeting Albanese said, “People’s circumstances change, people can be radicalised over a period of time. Licences should not be in perpetuity.”

New South Wales Premier Chris Minns earlier flagged that NSW was looking to make changes to its gun laws.

“We need to make sure the firearms legislation in New South Wales is fit for purpose. That does mean restricting firearms for the general public, for the people of New South Wales,” Minns said.

The shootings were carried out by a father and son. The father, Sajid Akram, 50, was killed, while his son, Naveed Akram, 24, is in hospital. The father, who came to Australia in 1998 on a student visa, had a gun licence and six weapons.

Names and details of victims emerged during the day. They included a 87-year-old Holocaust survivor, Alexander Kleytman, and a 10-year-old girl, Matilda. Other victims were Rabbi Eli Schlanger, 41, local Jewish volunteer Marika Pogany, 82, and former NSW police officer Peter Meagher, 78. French National Dan Elkayam and one Israeli national were also killed.

Late Monday NSW Health confirmed 27 patients were receiving care in Sydney hospitals.

In a day of crisis talks, federal cabinet also met, as well as its national security committee.

Albanese declared, “We will do whatever is necessary to stamp out antisemitism”.

But pressed on the recommendations of the government’s envoy to combat antisemitism, Jillian Segal, who reported some months ago, Albanese did not commit to implementing her more radical proposals

Segal on Monday reiterated antisemitism needed to be attacked “through education, through very clear guardrails in relation to what’s acceptable in terms of our laws, through carrying through with prosecutions and penalties, through what’s happening on social media and through community speaking out.

“It means bringing that definition of antisemitism alive through the public sector. It means making sure our immigration settings are appropriate at a state level. I think we obviously need to review gun licenses.”

The Bondi attack attracted attention around the world.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly attacked Albanese.

“Your government did nothing to stop the spread of antisemitism in Australia.

“You did nothing to curb the cancer cells that were growing inside your country. You took no action. You let the disease spread and the result is the horrific attacks on Jews we saw today.”

Netanyahu made special reference to Ahmed Al Ahmed who disarmed one of the gunmen: “a brave man, turns out a Muslim […] and I salute him”.

Local Jewish leaders condemned what they regard as inadequate past action against antisemitism and called for renewed efforts to combat it.

Josh Frydenberg, former Liberal treasurer in the Morrison government and a leader in the Jewish community said: “our governments, federal and state, our leadership in our civil institutions have not done enough.

“And the questions must be asked, why didn’t they act? Why didn’t they listen to the warnings, including from those who were heading up our intelligence and security agencies like ASIO, who said the rising antisemitism was their number one concern?” Frydenberg said.

The opposition was highly critical of the Albanese government.

Opposition leader Sussan Ley said, “We’ve seen a clear failure to keep Jewish Australians safe. We’ve seen a clear lack of leadership in keeping Jewish Australians safe. We have a government that sees antisemitism as a problem to be managed, not evil that needs to be eradicated.”

Former shadow home affairs spokesman Andrew Hastie claimed the government’s attention on gun reform was “a massive deflection” by the prime minister.

Hastie said the question was why when ASIO had identified Naveed Akram in 2019, his father been allowed to keep six guns.

“Let’s be clear here, it looks like radical militant Islam, who used guns to cut down people, innocent people, during a very significant religious festival, Hanukkah.” Hastie said.

He also stressed the need for screening people’s values as well as their views in relation to antisemitism.

“I want to see people coming to this country who speak English, who support Australian values of faith, reason, inquiry and debate […] we are a Judeo-Christian country, in the sense that that’s the basis on which our democracy works,” he told Sky.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. National cabinet agrees to sweeping overhaul of Australia’s gun laws in response to Bondi massacre – https://theconversation.com/national-cabinet-agrees-to-sweeping-overhaul-of-australias-gun-laws-in-response-to-bondi-massacre-271949

December 16, 2025

In a cynical industry, Rob Reiner’s films taught us the power of sincerity

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Adam Daniel, Associate Lecturer in Communication, Western Sydney University

Rob Reiner, the celebrated Hollywood director whose diverse filmography was loved by a broad array of audiences, was found dead on Sunday in Los Angeles. He was 78.

Authorities have described the deaths of Reiner and his wife, Michele Singer Reiner, as suspected homicide. Their son, Nick, has been arrested in relation to their death.

Despite this tragic and shocking news, the many tributes to Reiner that have emerged overnight have celebrated the evident warmth, intelligence and humour of the man and his work.

From my perspective, Reiner’s career stands as one of the clearest demonstrations of a director moving fluidly across genres while maintaining a consistent worldview.

Whether they were romantic comedies (When Harry Met Sally…, The American President, The Sure Thing), thrillers (Misery), courtroom dramas (A Few Good Men) or coming-of-age fables (Stand By Me), Reiner’s films return again and again to deeply humanist beliefs: that people, however flawed, are capable of growth and connection; that care and empathy for each other is vital; and that cinematic stories can help us recognise this in one another.

Taking comedy seriously

First entering the cultural imagination as Meathead on TV’s All in the Family (1971–79), Reiner’s performances as an actor often concealed his sharp political intelligence beneath blunt humour.

This tension between surface comedy and underlying seriousness would also become a defining feature of his work as a director.

From the outset of his directing career with This Is Spinal Tap (1984), Reiner used comedy as a way of revealing character, contradiction and vulnerability.

This Is Spinal Tap became one of the most influential comedies ever made and my personal favourite comedy of all time.

Often celebrated for its improvisational brilliance and satirical sharpness, I think the film is equally remarkable for its affection towards its characters. It treats the titular band’s absurdity as inseparable from their sincerity.

In doing so, Reiner also helped define a new comedic grammar in the mockumentary format that was incredibly influential for future generations of comedy filmmakers.

A huge emotional range

Across the late 1980s and early 1990s, Reiner’s extraordinary run of films demonstrated not only technical versatility but an emotional range that was rare among his peers.

The Princess Bride (1987) fused fairy-tale romance, adventure and meta-humour. When Harry Met Sally… (1989) remains one of the great comedic explorations of love, intimacy and relationships in American cinema.

Perhaps most striking was Reiner’s comfort with tonal complexity.

Stand by Me (1986), adapted from a Stephen King novella, looks back on childhood with both nostalgic memory and an acknowledgement of the darkness underneath suburban adolescence. Misery (1990), another King adaptation, examines toxic fandom and obsession in a taut and compelling thriller with splashes of dark humour.

A Few Good Men (1992) brings courtroom theatrics into conversation with questions of authority and ethical responsibility in the military, and gave us two iconic performances from Hollywood superstars Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson.

What unites these films is not a particular style or subject matter, but perspective.

Reiner’s direction often privileged performance and emotion. Even when working within genre frameworks, he never accepted genre as a cage. Instead, he understood the pleasures of genre and how to utilise their tropes to explore broader questions of humanity.

Sincerity as a strength

Politically outspoken and unapologetically engaged, Reiner also never separated civic responsibility from artistic practice.

However, his films resisted dogma. In an industry that often privileges cynicism or ironic distance, Reiner’s work insisted on sincerity as a strength.

If there was a through-line to Rob Reiner’s legacy, I would argue it is a desire for audiences to feel deeply without embarrassment. His films demonstrated that laughter could be one of the most humane forces storytelling has to offer.

As an adolescent cinephile raised in the 1980s and 1990s, Reiner’s work opened my eyes to how important emotional connection was in the pact between audience and film.

His ability to work effectively across genres was due to the masterful and sincere way he made us care for his characters, be they buffoonish rock stars, princes and princesses, military lawyers and generals, or teenage boys facing their first exposure to mortality.

Adam Daniel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. In a cynical industry, Rob Reiner’s films taught us the power of sincerity – https://theconversation.com/in-a-cynical-industry-rob-reiners-films-taught-us-the-power-of-sincerity-272164

December 16, 2025

Why can someone in suburban Sydney own 6 guns legally? New laws might change that

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Suzanna Fay, Associate Professor in Criminology, The University of Queensland

Australians have watched on in horror as more details have come to light about the shooters in the Bondi terror attacks.

As people grapple with the tragedy, many wonder how such a thing could have happened in a country that has long prided itself on its tough gun laws.

The 50-year-old father, Sajid Akram, and 24-year-old son, Naveed Akram, had six guns. Police confirmed all of them were registered firearms. The father, who was fatally shot by police, had a recreational hunting licence and was a member of a gun club.

National Cabinet has since committed to a raft of new gun laws, including renegotiating the National Firearms Agreement, caps on the amount of firearms any one person can own and limiting open-ended licensing.

So how easy is it to get a gun in Australia currently, and how might the reforms work?

The laws of gun ownership

Gun control laws vary slightly in each state and territory, but are broadly similar. We’ll look here at the laws in New South Wales.

The first step is to apply for a firearms licence. As part of this, authorities will conduct a background check to ensure there’s no criminal history, including mental health orders or domestic violence charges.

The applicant must also pass the “fit and proper person” test. NSW Police says this test checks someone is “of good character, law abiding, honest, and shows good judgement”.

If these standards are met, a firearms licence is granted.

But in order to actually buy a firearm, people must apply for a “permit to acquire”. This is linked to the specific firearm they’d like to purchase.

If it’s their first gun, there’s a 28 day waiting period before they can have it in their possession. Subsequent guns do not need a waiting period as long as it’s in the same category they already have approval to own.

They must also pass a safety course, with both practical and theoretical components, including a written test.

Firearms, once acquired, must be stored in a specific way. Guns cannot be stored while loaded, for instance, and ammunition must be kept in a separate safe.

Finally, someone must have a “genuine reason” to buy a firearm. These include working as a primary producer, or participating in recreational hunting, among others. They need to prove a genuine reason for each and every firearm purchase. Personal protection is not a a genuine reason.

Applicants need to prove their reason is truthful. This may be proof of membership to a gun club, or a letter with express permission from the landowner on whose property they intend to hunt.

Importantly, if someone holds a firearm licence for recreational purposes, they must compete in a certain amount of competitions each year. In NSW, it’s two to four.

What works well?

Many parts of Australian gun control laws work well.

The genuine reason provisions are particularly useful. By requiring people to engage with the firearm-owning community, it stops so called “lone-wolves” from buying a gun just to have.

My research with gun clubs has also shown members can be a crucial grassroots safety check. They typically look out for each other and check in if there’s a concerning shift in someone’s attitudes or beliefs.

If things seem particularly dangerous, many report fellow members to the police so they can investigate further. The gun owning community also want our communities to be safe.

It raises the question of how engaged the shooter in this case was with his local gun community.

What could change?

While the exact circumstances for these two shooters are still emerging, we know one of the men was known to ASIO (the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation). The guns were registered to the father.

National Cabinet has agreed to a list of measures, including speeding up work on a national firearms register and limiting gun licences to Australian citizens.

They will also move to cap the number of guns a person can own. Western Australia did this earlier this year. Recreational shooters in WA can have up to five firearms, while primary producers and competition shooters can have up to ten.

It’s not uncommon for people to have more than one firearm. Licensed firearm owners in NSW have an average of about four, according to a 2025 report.

While it’s reasonable to examine the working of our current gun control measures, it’s unclear how effective such a measure would be. In the case of the Bondi attack, we need more information about the sorts of guns that were used and how many were used.

Plus, under the current laws across the country, people can’t buy more guns just because they feel like it. They have to prove a genuine reason to own another one.

What about reviewing licences?

National Cabinet also decided to limit open-ended firearm licensing.

As it stands, licences are usually not granted for life. Renewal periods differ depending on the jurisdiction, but in NSW most licences are issued for somewhere between two and five years. We don’t yet know if any changes would make these renewal periods more frequent.

But licensing mechanisms, like recent concerns over working with children checks in the childcare sector, only capture what we know has happened. Unless people have already fallen foul of the law, authorities won’t necessarily find any concerning behaviour.

Indeed, authorities have said the Bondi shooter who owned these firearms had “no incidents” with his licence. Renewing it more regularly may have unearthed something important, or it may not have. We don’t know enough about this incident yet to say if such a law change would have been useful here.

If reviews were made much more frequent, that would require a large-scale increase in police resources.

One change that might help would be to actively involve firearms dealers in these legal changes. They have the most contact with those purchasing guns and may have valuable intelligence about how their customers are behaving and thinking.

So while changes in the letter of the law may or may not help monitor firearms owners, we have to ensure it’s implemented effectively too. This means resourcing authorities properly, working closely with communities and making sure legal changes would actually tell us what we need to know to prevent deadly gun violence.

Suzanna Fay has received funding from the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia for a research project in 2018 and the University of Queensland.

– ref. Why can someone in suburban Sydney own 6 guns legally? New laws might change that – https://theconversation.com/why-can-someone-in-suburban-sydney-own-6-guns-legally-new-laws-might-change-that-272067