The Australian Labor politician
who sparked the country’s social media ban has admitted
young people will find a way around it, but argues that
curbing addiction in young people is more
important.
South Australia Premier Peter Malinauskas
sparked the idea, initially proposing a state-wide age limit
and commissioning a report from the Chief Justice of the
High Court Robert French last year.
Within days the
idea was picked up by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s
government and later passed as a nationwide law. It’s
expected to come into force in November.
The idea has
now been raised in New Zealand. Last week, Prime Minister
Christopher Luxon announced the issue would be formally
investigated and Education Minister Erica Stanford would
lead the work.
National MP Catherine Wedd has
also put forward a member’s bill modelled on the
Australian law, and ACT leader David Seymour is
calling for a parliamentary inquiry on the
issue.
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading
Australia’s law puts the obligation on
technology companies to take reasonable steps to prevent
young people under 16 from creating social media accounts,
and companies that fail to introduce adequate safeguards
will face fines of up to A$49.5 million
(NZ$53.6m).
Platforms including Snapchat, TikTok,
Facebook, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter) are included –
but messaging and gaming sites, along with YouTube – are
not.
Malinauskas told Morning Report he was
sure an “intuitive young person” would find their way around
the ban and some would lie to get around an age verification
check. He argued people still smoked and drank alcohol
underage, but did it less when there were laws against these
actions.
“What we now know is that these social media
platforms are industrialising addiction – coming up with
algorithms that very deliberately are designed to have young
people addicted to their platforms.
“Now wherever you
see a product or a service, that relies upon instituting
addiction, particularly for young people, that invites a
government policy response – particularly when we know it’s
doing harm.”
The law prompted a backlash. Last week on
Morning Report retired
judge and online law expert David Harvey said it was
parents’ responsibility to implement rules around social
media use, asking: “Do you want the government to solve
every problem?”
Malinauskas pushed back, saying that
argument was used by those who had not parented a child
where “every single kid in the class had a mobile phone”,
and where core socialising was done through social
media.
“What this is doing is giving the parents the
tool to say ‘no’ to their kids, without them being isolated
socially.”
The Australian government has recruited a
UK company, the Age Check Certification Scheme, to carry out
trials of potential age verification
technologies.
About 30 social media companies are said
to be involved in the trial, and a report was due back to
the government at the end of last month but was not being
made public, according to a Guardian
report.
Asked if he had heard how that technology was
working, Malinauskas said: “Look, there are complexities,
but we believe by November this year the Commonwealth will
very much have a means to be able to do
this.”
Malinauskas admitted there would be challenges,
but maintained the ban “would be worth it”.
Along with
messaging and gaming sites, YouTube was also exempt. YouTube
is the most popular social media platform in Australia
according to Australia’s independent regulator for online
safety, eSafety, with 73 percent of children aged 13 to 15
reported to have used the platform.
Documents
published by Australian media
reveal strong lobbying from YouTube attempting to avoid
the ban, but YouTube and Communications Minister Michelle
Rowland told RNZ it was given an exemption on the grounds of
health and education from the get-go.
Malinauskas said
social media was being defined as an online tool that has a
communicative effect, as distinct from one that generates
one-way traffic.
“YouTube is a different product in
its nature to Facebook and Instagram, there are things that
distinguish it, but ultimately ministers will make
judgements about what are exempt services on the basis of
advice they receive from a range of services, including the
eSafety Commission.”
‘Parents feel
powerless’
Education Minister Erica Stanford told
Morning Report New Zealand would be a “fast follower”
behind Australia, “a good position to be in because we can
go and cherry-pick what is working around the world [and]
take a much more nuanced and pragmatic approach perhaps than
the Australians”.
“We have heard from parents,
teachers and principals… how important this is and how
much feeling there was out there. And, you know, parents
know the harm, they see it, and they want us to do something
about it. And I’ve always wanted to lead work like
this.”
She said any proposed restrictions would “go
through the normal process”, and not be fast-tracked into
law, like
last week’s controversial Pay Equity Amendment
Bill.
“Well, the very first step for me is to
probably set up a policy advisory group. I’ve already
started to have conversations with some world-leading
experts on legislative change and what works and has worked
in other countries.”
She said Luxon wanted it in law
before the next election. Luxon confirmed later in the show
it would follow the usual process into law.
“What
we’re wanting to do is, you know, synthesise what’s
happening all around the world. As you know, Australia, US
states, UK, EU, Canada are all doing work in this space, and
then quickly pull that together and take a bill into the
Cabinet and then obviously out through consultation and into
law.”
The idea was met with some scepticism from ACT,
Seymour suggesting a “quality public inquiry” would be
needed, with parents, educational psychologists and social
media companies part of the process.
“The issue that
ACT have got is not a philosophical one,” Stanford said.
“They know the harm, I know David knows the harm… My job
is to go and find out what does work and get him on
board.”
She agreed with host Corin Dann it was “a
little unusual” for a centre-right party to be “advocating
for the state to intervene” instead of leaving it to
parents.
“You’re right. However, the harm is immense.
There’s so much evidence out there showing the harm, and
parents know it, and they are powerless. I’m powerless. I’ve
had my own kids go through this, and even I couldn’t do
anything about it, because every other kid’s got the device
and every other kid’s chatting with each other, and you
can’t – you feel that, you can’t exclude your kid because
then they won’t be able to make friends and be
included.
“And parents feel powerless. They need
someone… they want someone to come in and help create
those guardrails. And yeah, it’s going to be difficult and
it’s not going to be easy, but we need to create a societal
shift that says, ‘Hey, this is the harm, we all know it, and
here are the guardrails.'”
Stanford said the cellphone
ban in schools was met with scepticism when first announced,
“but it’s turned out that it’s one of the best things we
ever did in education. And there’s almost no dissenting
voices now.”
‘Kids talking and playing with each
other’
Malinauskas was the first politician to
propose a social media ban, saying the idea started with a
call from his wife who had read a book by American
psychologist Jonathan Haidt called The Anxious
Generation, which posits that the overuse of social
media had sparked an epidemic of anxiety and depression
among Generation Z.
He also said South Australia was
the first state in the country to implement a
ban on cellphones in schools, which he said generated
passionate feedback – including one principal initially
against the idea who changed her mind, and said she heard a
sound that she had not heard in 10 years: “Kids talking and
playing with each other”.
“What harm is done to them
by not having access to social media? I mean what’s the
worst possible thing that happens here?
“If kids get
off social media, if 14-year-olds are off social media,
what’s the worst outcome here? They start conversing with
one another and engaging with one another in a way that was
happening only 10 years ago.”
A Meta spokesperson
said: “Meta is committed to youth safety and has built many
tools and features to help teens have safe, positive
experiences and give parents simple ways to set boundaries,
including the introduction of Instagram Teen Accounts in New
Zealand earlier this year.
“We look forward to
engaging with all stakeholders in New Zealand to discuss the
best solutions for young people moving forward.
“One
simple option we believe has merit is age verification at
the operating system and app store level, like the law
passed in Utah earlier this year. This approach reduces the
burden on parents and teens and minimises the amount of
sensitive information shared.”
Snapchat and X were
approached for
comment.
New Zealand’s public broadcaster, providing comprehensive NZ news and current affairs, specialist audio features and documentaries.
Radio New Zealand is a Crown entity established under the Radio New Zealand Act 1995. Radio New Zealand News are vital elements in our programming, providing impartial news and information to New Zealanders every day. Radio New Zealand (RNZ) provides listeners with exciting and independent radio programmes in accordance with the Radio New Zealand Charter.
