Cashing In on Fear: How “Child-Safe” Smartphones Exploit New Laws and Parental Anxiety

By South Burnett Advocate Editorial Team

Australia’s new child safety legislation was designed to protect young people online. Instead, it’s created a gold rush for tech manufacturers who see dollar signs in parental anxiety. The latest example: the HMD Fuse, launched on August 21, 2025, for $799 plus ongoing monthly fees, already receiving glowing coverage on A Current Affair—one of Australia’s most trusted current affairs programs.

This isn’t journalism. It’s free advertising for a product that promises what it cannot deliver, wrapped in the credibility of investigative reporting. And it’s just the beginning of a dangerous trend that could make children less safe while emptying parents’ wallets.

The Perfect Storm: New Laws, Old Media, Big Profits

The timing isn’t coincidental. As Australian lawmakers demand stronger safeguards for young users, manufacturers are racing to position themselves as the solution. The HMD Fuse arrives with perfect marketing timing—a “child-safe” smartphone that appears to address regulatory concerns while generating substantial ongoing revenue through subscription fees.

When established media programs like A Current Affair feature these devices, they lend journalistic credibility to what amounts to expensive security theater. Parents watching don’t see product placement—they see trusted reporters validating a solution to their deepest fears about their children’s digital safety.

This media legitimisation creates a feedback loop: coverage validates the product, encouraging other manufacturers to develop similar devices, generating more media interest, and building an entire industry around monetising parental fear.

The Subscription Economy of Fear

At $799 upfront plus $26.95 monthly after the first year, the HMD Fuse represents more than expensive hardware—it’s a business model built on ongoing anxiety. Parents aren’t just buying a phone; they’re subscribing to the illusion of safety.

The same modest hardware costs under $300 in standard smartphones. The premium pays for “AI-powered” filtering and parental controls that free or low-cost apps provide. But the real product isn’t the phone—it’s the peace of mind parents think they’re buying, delivered through monthly payments that keep the revenue flowing.

This subscription model creates perverse incentives. Companies profit more from sustained parental worry than from actually solving safety concerns. Effective, permanent solutions don’t generate monthly revenue. Partial solutions that require ongoing “protection services” do.

The Dangerous Paradox: How “Safe” Phones Make Children Less Safe

The most troubling aspect isn’t the price gouging—it’s the false security that encourages parents to reduce their vigilance. When manufacturers claim their AI can actively block inappropriate content across all apps, parents naturally assume their child is protected and may allow longer unsupervised use.

But online threats evolve daily. Bad actors adapt with coded language, private messaging, and disguised imagery that slip past even advanced filters. No algorithm can replace an engaged adult’s judgment and context.

Worse, the Fuse’s main feature—HarmBlock+—fixates on blocking nude imagery while ignoring far more common dangers: violent content, hate speech, bullying, predatory grooming through text, and the psychological toll of social media. By hyping nudity-blocking, HMD distracts parents from the everyday risks their children actually face.

A child with a “safe” phone and less supervision is more exposed than one with a basic device and active parental engagement.

The Media’s Role in Legitimising Exploitation

When A Current Affair features the HMD Fuse, decades of journalistic credibility transfer to a product that may harm the very children it claims to protect. Viewers trust that investigative reporters have scrutinised claims and verified effectiveness.

The pattern repeated on Channel 7’s Sunrise, where tech editor Shaun White presented what he claimed to have “discovered”—using identical marketing language about the “world’s first smartphone for kids.” Since these initial broadcasts, dosens of additional Australian media outlets have published promotional coverage, creating exactly the avalanche of legitimising journalism we warned would follow.

This coordinated promotional coverage transforms individual editorial failures into systematic consumer deception. When multiple trusted news sources simultaneously validate the same expensive product using identical language, parents naturally assume the safety claims have been independently verified by professional journalists.

This isn’t isolated to one program or one device. As more manufacturers develop similar products, we can expect more “investigative” coverage that functions as extended advertisements for expensive solutions to problems that require human engagement, not technological fixes.

What Parents Really Need

Real digital safety doesn’t come from expensive subscriptions—it comes from investment in human connections and practical strategies:

• Active supervision over algorithmic filtering: No AI can replace engaged parental oversight and age-appropriate guidance.
• Open communication channels: Children need to feel safe discussing what they encounter online without fear of losing device privileges.
• Digital literacy education: Teaching children to recognise and respond to online risks is more valuable than trying to shield them from all potential exposure.
• Affordable, practical tools: Standard devices with free or low-cost parental controls often provide the same functionality without exploitative pricing.
• Household device boundaries: Clear rules about when, where, and how devices are used, backed by family time and offline activities.

Following the Money

The emergence of “child-safe” smartphones isn’t driven by breakthrough safety technology or genuine child protection concerns. It’s a calculated response to legislative changes that create market opportunities for expensive solutions to problems that require human, not technological, responses.

Follow the money: manufacturers profit from initial sales and ongoing subscriptions, media companies benefit from advertising revenue and engaging content about child safety, and everyone wins except the children who may face increased risks due to reduced parental vigilance and the parents paying premium prices for false peace of mind.

A Warning for Australian Families

As more “child-safe” devices hit the market with accompanying media coverage, parents should ask critical questions: Who profits from this solution? What evidence supports the safety claims? Does this encourage or replace active parental involvement?

The HMD Fuse’s launch and immediate media validation signals the beginning of an industry built on exploiting parental love and fear. Australian families deserve better than expensive technological band-aids that may increase the very risks they claim to prevent.

Genuine protection emerges from human engagement and practical strategies—not from costly subscriptions to corporate promises of digital protection. Don’t let fear-driven marketing and media legitimisation fool you into buying safety that can’t be sold.