Latest news with #OnlineSafetyAmendment
Sky News AU
13-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Sky News AU
'I don't care what people say about me': Why Candice Warner wants her daughters on social media despite new age restrictions
Candice Warner has opened up about her and husband David Warner's decision to allow their young daughters to be on social media, explaining why she's not worried about the backlash. The former ironwoman, 40, and Australian cricket star, 38, share daughters Ivy, 10, Indy, nine, and Isla, five, and set up a joint Instagram account for them in October 2023. "During Covid, David was really big on TikTok. He loved doing all the dances and the girls would often get involved," Candice told Stellar. "I saw how much fun we were having as a family. It brought us together on the weekends. "So I started the Instagram account and it was a way for us to teach the girls how to use social media responsibly." Despite having famous parents, Warner said her daughters are "no different to any other kid". "Yes, they've got parents with a high profile, but for us, it was all about putting out a positive image," she said. "At the moment, it's fun. They're not influencers. They're just young girls living their life, having fun, being sporty, and I capture it and I put it on a page." The move comes in the wake of the Federal Government's Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act, passed last year, which set the minimum age for social media accounts at 16. The legislation is expected to be implemented by year's end and cites connections between social media use and mental health issues among young Australians. Warner, who has been outspoken about mental health issues, said she supports the change- but believes education at home is just as crucial. Last month, she opened up about her own struggles following the public fallout from a 2007 incident involving footballer Sonny Bill Williams, which saw her face years of scrutiny and online abuse. "Suicide happens from all this online trolling," she said. "It's very serious." Still, she reiterated that her daughters don't actually run the joint account themselves. "Our girls don't have (personal social media) accounts because I don't believe that young kids have the mental capacity to deal with trolls," she said. "But for us, their joint social media is about teaching our girls how to use it responsibly." Candice added that while both she and David still "experience trolling", shielding their kids from it completely isn't realistic. "I don't care what people say about me, about my husband, about us as a family- it's their opinion, it's not fact. They don't know us," she said. "I'm not here to defend (the girls' social media) page, but I'm here to say that, yes, it can be dangerous. "I truly believe what (Prime Minister) Anthony Albanese is doing is the right thing to protect young adults. "But we also have an obligation as a parent- most parents have social media- to teach our kids how to use it in a positive way." The Warners, who marked their 10th wedding anniversary in April, are "incredibly proud of where we're at in life," she added, "and the parents that we've become." Since retiring from Test cricket in 2024, David has been playing in domestic T20 leagues, including for the Sydney Thunder, and has even hinted at a potential career in politics. Candice, meanwhile, has continued to build her media career, with a regular gig on Triple M's Dead Set Legends radio show every Saturday. If you or anyone you know needs help: Lifeline: 13 11 14 Beyond Blue: 1300 22 4636 Kids Helpline: 1800 55 1800
Herald Sun
11-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Herald Sun
Candice Warner: Marriage to David Warner and why couple are putting daughters on Instagram
Candice Warner reveals why she and husband David have set up a dedicated social media page for their three daughters. Stellar: Happy Mother's Day. You're on the cover of Stellar with your husband, David Warner, and your daughters, Ivy, 10, Indi, 9, and Isla, 5. Three children and lots of props … How was the shoot? Candice Warner: It was so much fun and suited our family to a tee. We had bikes, tennis racquets, balls, hula hoops. That's no different to what our house is like, except I put my foot down because there are no skateboards or bikes in our house. Stellar: You're an extremely close-knit family. Is that shifting as the girls start getting older? Candice Warner: We're still incredibly close. [David] retired from playing cricket for Australia [in 2024] but he's still away a lot. So the girls are my best friends. We do everything together. I'm one of those mothers that loves to be there. I'm present. I'm at school pick-up and I try to do it all because I love that and I had parents like that. The girls are so different. Ivy, she's the sensitive one. I can rely on her for absolutely anything and everything. Indi is the joker, always making us laugh. And then we have Isla, who is the spitting image of David and full of energy. Listen to a new episode of Something To Talk About featuring Candice Warner below: Stellar: One of the biggest hot-button issues this past year has been the conversation surrounding social media and children. Your daughters have a shared Instagram account called The Warner Sisters, managed by yourself and David, which you started in late 2023 – it now has almost 200,000 followers. Tell me about your decision to open an account for them, especially when so many parents are evaluating their kids' relationship with social media? Candice Warner: During Covid, David was really big on TikTok. He loved doing all the dances and the girls would often get involved. I saw how much fun we were having as a family. It brought us together on the weekends. So I started the Instagram account and it was a way for us to teach the girls how to use social media responsibly. Before we post anything, we show them, they can read the comments, it's all about teaching them, guiding them. Our kids are no different to any other kid. They play sport, they like to do dances. Yes, they've got parents with a high profile, but for us, it was all about putting out a positive image… At the moment, it's fun. They're not influencers. They're just young girls living their life, having fun, being sporty, and I capture it and I put it on a page. The Federal Government passed the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act last year, which introduced a minimum age of 16 for accounts on certain social media platforms, noting the link between the rise of social media and the harm to the mental health of young Australians. To be clear, the girls don't manage the account themselves, yourself and David post on their behalf. But how do you navigate issues such as trolling? [Of all the comments we've received] 99.9 per cent have been positive. If there have ever been any negative comments, it's about us as parents, not so much about the kids. In regards to [last year's change in legislation], I definitely support that. Suicide happens from all this online trolling and that's very serious. Our girls don't have [personal social media] accounts because I don't believe that young kids have the mental capacity to deal with trolls. But for us, their joint social media is about teaching our girls how to use it responsibly. They have an input in what we show. I teach them about ignoring negativity. We have experienced trolling. We still experience it… But if you completely block [social media] out and say it doesn't exist, then I don't think you're teaching your kids how to use it properly. If you want to protect your kids in a way where you're not teaching them any life skills, then you're letting your kids down. The Danish royal family recently released an official portrait of Princess Isabella, the 18-year-old daughter of King Frederik and Queen Mary, in which she was holding an iPhone. It sparked huge debate. What do you think that discussion says about us as a society? Everyone is really quick to judge and to point the finger, but let's face it, you might be sitting at the traffic lights and every single person on that bus has their head down on their phone. You go to a park and are playing with your kids [and] the majority of the mums and dads are sitting there on their phones. They're a part of our life, phones aren't going anywhere. Social media isn't going anywhere, but it's about limiting it and using it in a positive way. In speaking about this to Stellar today are you bracing yourselves for potentially negative responses from some people? I don't care what people say about me, about my husband, about us as a family – it's their opinion, it's not fact. They don't know us. I'm not here to defend [the girls' social media] page, but I'm here to say that, yes, it can be dangerous. I truly believe what [Prime Minister] Anthony Albanese is doing is the right thing to protect young adults. But we also have an obligation as a parent – most parents have social media – to teach our kids how to use it in a positive way. Let's not be all doom and gloom about social media. It can be wonderful if we know how to use it correctly and if we can empower or educate or make people smile or laugh. Listen to a new episode of Something To Talk About featuring Candice Warner below: A lot of other high-profile Australians blank out the faces of their children or don't post them on social media, but you and David haven't chosen to do that? We've never found a need to blank our kids' faces out. We're incredibly protective of our girls, don't get us wrong. But I don't feel like someone is going to come and kidnap my daughter if they know what school she's at. I'm not that type of parent. You've got to live a little bit. Just because we have a profile and my husband plays cricket, are we supposed to just live behind four walls and never leave there and never let our kids be seen or heard? If it's good for us, it's good for our kids. And they're very happy. They're thriving. They're really happy young girls. Yes, we're protective but we're also realistic in the world that we live in. You appeared in the newspaper at the age of 14, when you were beginning your ironwoman career. Do you think the pressure you felt as a result of that kind of exposure at a young age differs from your three daughters' experience of living a public life? I know with myself at such a young age, I didn't start putting pressure on myself because my photo was in the paper. I put pressure on myself because I worked really hard and I wanted to achieve at a high level. So pressure is sometimes a good thing. And my girls understand pressure. They play tennis five, six times a week. Most of the time in tennis, you lose; in a tournament, there's only ever going to be one winner. So tennis teaches you how to lose. It teaches you to be resilient, how to keep turning up week after week when you may not have had a win. Almost every parent wants to teach resilience to their children. What's your hack? The best way to teach resilience is to not wrap your kids in cotton wool. A bit of tough love. How can you teach resilience if they've never failed? How can you tell your kids to get back up when they've never fallen? We love our kids and we support them but we also need to let them learn for themselves sometimes. And losing or failing, it doesn't mean that's the end. It means there's going to be growth. Listen to a new episode of Something To Talk About featuring Candice Warner below: You and David celebrated your 10th wedding anniversary last month. How do you reflect on your time together? I'm incredibly proud of where we're at in life, where our kids are at and the parents that we've become. Our relationship is very strong, but it always has been. Certain situations that we've overcome together have made us even stronger. We look at our kids and we see them as our biggest achievements. We're really proud of how far we've come and that we didn't give up along the way. Read the full interview with Candice Warner and see the shoot with the Warner family inside today's Stellar via The Sunday Telegraph (NSW), Sunday Herald Sun (VIC), The Sunday Mail (QLD) and Sunday Mail (SA). And listen to Candice on the Stellar podcast, Something To Talk About, wherever you get your podcasts. For more from Stellar and the podcast, Something To Talk About, click here. Originally published as 'I'm proud of where we're at in life': Candice Warner on marriage to David Warner and why their daughters are on social media
NZ Herald
08-05-2025
- Politics
- NZ Herald
Proposed social media ban for under-16s gains support in Northland
NetSafe had expressed concern around how the ban will work and what the ramifications could be for youth. In Northland, Tai Tokerau Principals' Association spokesman and Whangārei principal Pat Newman was fully supportive. 'We know that in Whangārei we've had teenage suicides as a result of bullying on the internet.' He said some children had been 'scared stiff' to attend school because of cyber-bullying. Newman believed social media allowed for a disconnect that made it easy for young people to write 'nasty, vindictive things'. Children as young as 11 were sending explicit images through social media platforms, too. 'It's easy to send photos of yourself that in 10 years you may not want people to have seen.' Newman said children as young as 9 were organising fights online. The issue came to light in the media last year when a 14-year-old was left with a concussion and other injuries after a violent assault at the Fireworks Spectacular event. The video, circulated widely on social media, showed the boy being kicked in the head. Two students were also assaulted at Kerikeri High School last month, with principal Mike Clent concerned a video of the fight may have been circulating online. Newman believed social media encouraged 'inappropriate adult behaviour' to be undertaken by youngsters. 'We would not let a 10-year-old hop behind the wheel of a fast car and drive off without anybody supervising them,' he said. 'Yet we let them play with and use something just as lethal.' Newman acknowledged social media was a valuable tool in the right hands but people under 16 were still developing. Principals were doing all they could to educate and prevent harm but Newman said a level of responsibility needed to come from parents as well. Netsafe chief executive Brent Carey said Australia's Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill was an example of legislative gaps. 'Our decades of work in this space have shown us the multifaceted nature of these challenges, and effective solutions typically require a more nuanced and long-term approach.' Carey said implementation of the bill and subsequent challenges were of significant concern. Some challenges with Australia's ban included exemptions for platforms like messaging apps, online gaming platforms and services for health and education. 'Such exemptions could lead to inconsistencies in online safety measures and potentially shift risks to less moderated environments.' He said the Australian Human Rights Commission had concerns the ban was a 'blunt instrument' that could inadvertently harm young people by cutting access to support networks. Whangārei Intermediate School learning support co-ordinator Christine Thomson supported the ban. She had observed that students between 10 and 13 years old frequently used social media without supervision. Thomson had seen situations where students had spoken to people posing as teens. Fights were also organised, filmed and posted 'immediately' online, she said. Cyber-bullying had driven some students to be so anxious they avoided school altogether as well. Thomson said the problem was difficult to fully police as pages or groups that were shut down often resurfaced under new profiles. Serious incidents were often reported to Netsafe or police, where required. She felt students were too young to fully understand the responsibility social media use required. Brodie Stone covers crime and emergency for the Northern Advocate. She has spent most of her life in Whangārei and is passionate about delving into issues that matter to Northlanders and beyond.
The Spinoff
06-05-2025
- Politics
- The Spinoff
Banning teens from social media won't keep them safe. Regulating platforms might
The new member's bill misdirects attention from the systemic drivers of online harm and places the burden of online safety on young people themselves, while the systems that foster harm continue unchecked. A National MP's proposal to ban under-16s from social media is being pitched as a bold move to protect young people. But the reality is more complicated and far more concerning. If the National Party is serious about addressing the real harms young people face online, banning users is not the solution. Regulating platforms is. The Social Media Age-Appropriate Users Bill, a proposed member's bill led by backbencher Catherine Wedd, would require social media platforms to take 'all reasonable steps' to prevent under-16s from creating accounts. Although only a member's bill yet to be drawn from the biscuit tin, the bill was announced by prime minister Christopher Luxon via X and thereby has the PM's obvious stamp of approval. The bill echoes Australia's recently passed Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024, which imposes significant penalties on platforms that fail to keep children under 16 off their services. Wedd, like many who support these measures, points to concerns about online bullying, addiction and other inappropriate content. These are real issues. But the bill misdirects attention from the systemic drivers of online harm and places the burden of online safety on young people themselves. A popular move, but a flawed premise This policy will likely have the support of parents, similar to the school phone ban – it is a visible, straightforward response to something that feels out of control. And it offers the comfort of doing something in the face of real concern. However, this kind of ban performs accountability but does not address where the real power lies. Instead, if the aim of the policy is to reduce online harm and increase online safety, then they should consider holding social media companies responsible for the design choices that expose young people to harm. For instance, according to Netsafe, the phone ban has not eliminated cyberbullying, harassment or image-based sexual abuse for our young people. At the heart of the proposal is the assumption that banning teens from social media will protect them. But age-based restrictions are easily circumvented. Young people already know how to create fake birthdates, or create secondary accounts, or use a VPN to bypass restrictions. And even if the verification process becomes more robust through facial recognition, ID uploads, or other forms of intrusive surveillance, it raises significant privacy concerns, especially for minors. Without additional regulatory safeguards, such measures may introduce further ways to harm users' rights by, for example, normalising digital surveillance. In practice, this kind of policy will not keep young people off social media. It will just push them into less visible, less regulated corners of the internet and into the very spaces where the risk of harm is often higher. Furthermore, there is a growing body of research – including my own – showing that online harm is not simply a function of age or access. It is shaped by the design of platforms, the content that is amplified, and the failures of tech companies to moderate harmful material effectively. Misdiagnosing the problem Online harm is real. But banning access is a blunt instrument. It does not address the algorithms that push disinformation, misogyny and extremism into users' feeds. And it does not fix the fact that social media companies are not accountable to New Zealand law or to the communities they serve. In contrast, the UK's Online Safety Act 2023 holds platforms legally responsible for systemic harm. It shifts the burden of online safety away from individual users and onto the tech companies who design and profit from these systems. New Zealand once had the opportunity to move in that direction. Under the previous government, the Department of Internal Affairs proposed an independent regulator and a new code-based system to oversee digital platforms. That work was shelved by the coalition government. Now, we're offered a ban instead. Some may argue that regulating big tech companies is too complex and difficult — that it is easier to restrict access. But that narrative lets platforms off the hook. Countries like the UK and those in the European Union have already taken meaningful steps to regulate social media, requiring companies to assess and reduce risks, improve transparency, and prioritise user safety. While these laws are imperfect, they prove regulation is possible when there is political will. Pretending otherwise leaves the burden on parents and young people, while the systems that foster harm continue unchecked. What real online safety could look like If the National Party, or the government, truly wants to protect young people online, it should start with the platforms, not the users. That means requiring social media companies to ensure user safety, from design to implementation and use. It may also require ensuring digital literacy is a core part of our education system, equipping rangatahi with the tools to critically navigate online spaces. We also need to address the systemic nature of online harm, including the rising tide of online misogyny, racism and extremism. Abuse does not just happen, it is intensified by platforms designed to maximise engagement, often at the expense of safety. Any serious policy must regulate these systems and not just user behaviour. That means independent audits, transparency about how content is promoted, and real consequences for platforms that fail to act. Harms are also unevenly distributed. Māori, Pasifika, disabled and gender-diverse young people are disproportionately targeted. A meaningful response must be grounded in te Tiriti and human rights and not just age limits. There's a certain political appeal to a policy that promises to 'protect kids', especially one that appears to follow global trends. But that does not mean it is the right approach. Young people deserve better. They deserve a digital environment that is safe, inclusive, and empowering.
Scoop
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Members' Bill To Protect Under 16s From Social Media Harm
Press Release – New Zealand National Party The bill puts the onus on social media companies to verify that someone is over the age of 16 before they access social media platforms. Currently, there are no legally enforceable age verification measures for social media platforms in New Zealand. National Tukituki MP Catherine Wedd has put forward a new members' bill to protect young people from social media harm by restricting access for under 16s. 'Social media is an extraordinary resource, but it comes with risks, and right now we aren't manging the risks for our young people well,' Catherine Wedd says. 'My Social Media Age-Appropriate Users Bill is about protecting young people from bullying, inappropriate content and social media addiction by restricting access for under 16-year-olds. 'The bill puts the onus on social media companies to verify that someone is over the age of 16 before they access social media platforms. Currently, there are no legally enforceable age verification measures for social media platforms in New Zealand. 'As a mother of four children I feel very strongly that families and parents should be better supported when it comes to overseeing their children's online exposure. 'Parents and principals are constantly telling me they struggle to manage access to social media and are worried about the effect it's having on their children. 'The bill closely mirrors the approach taken in Australia, which passed the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill in December 2024.' 'Other jurisdictions are also taking action. Texas recently passed legislation which bans under 18s from social media use and the UK, the EU and Canada all have similar work in train. 'This bill builds on National's successful and successful cell phone ban in schools and reinforces the Government's commitment to setting our children up for success.' Notes: A copy of the Social Media Age-Restricted Users Bill is attached here. Key provisions of the Bill include: Provider obligations: Social media platforms must take all reasonable steps to prevent under-16s from creating accounts. Enforcement: The Bill introduces penalties for non-compliance, with courts empowered to issue financial penalties against platforms that fail to uphold age restrictions. Defences for providers: Platforms can rely on reasonable verification measures to demonstrate compliance. Regulatory oversight: The Minister will have the authority to designate specific platforms as age-restricted and enforce compliance.
