Latest news with #SocialMediaAge-RestrictedUsersBill
Newsroom
4 days ago
- Health
- Newsroom
High-flyer mums flex their parenting muscle
A year ago, a group of rich-lister mums met with other high fliers from all walks of life and political hues with one thing in mind. Many were strangers to each other but the thing that united them was the push to bring in a law to get under-16-year-olds off social media. Such is the power of the group B416 and their cause that politicians from all corners came along to their launch last month, including Act's David Seymour, who doesn't support a social media ban. It took place just days after National's Catherine Wedd put forward her Social Media Age-Restricted Users Bill, a private member's bill. Since the launch, the move has faced criticism of moral panic, overreach and that a ban will risk the lives of vulnerable young people. But B416, which is co chaired by entrepreneur Cecilia Robinson and includes multi millionaire toy maker Anna Mowbray, says it is time to listen to parents who want to protect their children from social media harm. Founding member Malindi MacLean, who heads Outward Bound, says a lot of the criticism is from people who are not parents. 'It's really important to keep [in mind] the lived experience of parents. They are day in, day out experiencing the impact of social media addiction, or addictive behaviours of their children. 'A parent who has just been dealing with their teenager who is self harming or has sextortion or dealing with cyber bullying … it's not something that you can argue with.' Those arguing against a potential law that would force social media giants to use age verification measures on under 16s include retired district court judge, David Harvey; youth mental health activist Jazz Thornton; Victoria University media lecturer Alex Beattie and the online counselling service Youthline. Judge Harvey says the proposed bill is flawed and could get the Government in trouble with freedom-of-expression laws. There's also a risk it will exclude the likes of YouTube, he says. Thornton believes a blanket ban will cause harm to the most vulnerable children and even lead to deaths, while Beattie argues social media can be a good communication tool for children and parents, and is not an addiction like smoking. MacLean says she welcomes the debate but her group wants progress. Hence the extensive billboard and social media campaign. She says the time and resources put into the campaign would be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. But the influential group has tapped into many communities for contributions and support. 'That just shows the appetite for change. The other thing is we've had a lot of support from organisations pro bono because most of them are human beings who also understand the issues.' Wedd's bill is in the biscuit tin in Parliament which means it may never see the light of day before the next election. That's not good enough for B416, which wants to see a policy by the end of the year, following Australia's world-first law and trials of the age-verification technology already underway. Tech expert Danu Abeysuriya of digital firm Rush tells The Detail how the technology could work and why it is important for New Zealand to follow Australia and others. 'We are a small nation and we don't represent a lot of revenue for large tech companies like Google, Facebook or X or Twitter. They focus on social media and to those companies our ad revenue is relatively small. 'Whatever we have to do we should still attempt to be practical otherwise we risk being alienated from those platforms. The balancing act is aligning what we do with what the rest of the world does.' Abeysuriya says there are a number of age-verification options but one of the simplest would be a digital token bought from the Warehouse, the local petrol station or even the child's school. Other technology could be used to put children off using social media, such as slowing down internet traffic. In this case the government would mandate Internet Service Providers such as One NZ to run traffic at half speed in specific time periods. 'It creates a bit of friction,' says Abeysuriya. 'If the TikTok video loads really slowly the kids might not watch the TikTok video, they might do something else like read a book.' He says the solutions are ideas and nothing will be perfect. 'The bravery to move is the thing that needs to happen here.' Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here. You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.
Otago Daily Times
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Otago Daily Times
Safety, rights and practicalities
It is tempting to cheer on the proposed social media ban for children under 16. Social media has proved toxic for young people and destructive to mental health. It is an avenue for bullying and exclusion, as well as unrealistic expectations about body image. It is laced with disinformation, misogyny and extremism. Its profit-seeking algorithms, gamification and predatory tactics harm children. Parents need the support of a ban as backup in their efforts to help protect the most vulnerable — children at a stage when their brains are maturing and they are especially susceptible to peer influence. Australia's looming ban has received popular support, and the Social Media Age-Restricted Users Bill is likely to be welcomed by a majority here if it comes to the House. Similar moves are under way in parts of the United States and Europe. The restrictions on mobile phones in New Zealand schools have largely been positive and accepted, despite various practical and other objections raised before the change was introduced. National failed to secure Act New Zealand's support to progress the Bill as a government measure. It must take its chances in the ballot as a Member's Bill. Labour, however, surprised by the support for and success of the school cellphone ban, is open to discussion. The political hurdles are not insurmountable. The Bill is under the name of MP Catherine Wedd. She argued that, as a mother of four, she was "living and breathing the negative impacts of social media in our communities every day". Parents needed the government to support them, she said. We ban underage harmful tobacco, vapes and firearms, so why not social media? Some say the onus should be on the platforms. They should be regulated and held to account. Good luck with that. Despite this lineup of strong reasons for the ban, practical and fundamental issues stand in the way of the Bill's good intent. It should also be acknowledged that social media has benefits for young people. It can create online communities for minorities, help the introverted and enable self-expression. Act said the Bill was hastily drafted, simplistic and unworkable. Indeed, the very definition of social media is causing headaches, notably as messaging apps spread their functions well beyond just messages and conversations. Popular games such as Roblox, Minecraft and Fortnite include social interaction. Google convinced the Australian government to exempt YouTube from the ban. If specific apps like TikTok, Instagram or Facebook are prohibited, others will take their place. Adolescents could be driven to less regulated or more dangerous platforms. Age verification is challenging and has yet to be fully clarified for Australia. Uploaded evidence could be faked. Smart teenagers could also easily set up virtual networks to pretend to be in another country. Such workarounds could rapidly spread. What is the point of a law if it cannot be enforced? Would it be just a feel-good failure? Everybody, it seems, would have to go through the age justification process, putting more data on the internet and giving more private information to the platforms. They are not to be trusted. How, too, would governments establish that social media companies were failing to verify ages? How could small countries like New Zealand enforce potential fines and penalties? There are issues about the government acting like a "nanny state", even potentially a police state. Responsibility and decision-making would be taken from parents, who have their individual values and contexts. A substantial intrusion on freedom of expression lies behind the issue. The ban specifically targets the ability and rights of under-16s to communicate, share ideas, and access information. Social media is about far more than entertainment and communication. For better and for worse, it is where many people, regardless of age, engage with news and the world and participate. It also sets a government precedent for restricting rights, the slippery slope. First, the under-16s, and what comes next? Practical considerations alone could be sufficient to block any effective change. If not, there remains the constant tension between safety and rights.
Scoop
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
We Can't Just Turn Off The Internet For Those Under 16
Press Release – NZ Council for Civil Liberties The New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties opposes this bill as unreasonable in principle and unworkable in practice and believes it should not be progressed if selected for introduction. The NZ Council for Civil Liberties opposes the Social Media Age-Restricted Users Bill presented by National MP Catherine Wedd with support from Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, which would ban those under 16 from accessing social media. The bill's definition of social media is incredibly broad and includes any platform where the primary purpose is to 'enable social interactions between 2 or more end-users'. This would include the obvious contenders such as Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter/X, YouTube, and Instagram, but also describes a large range of other sites such as Reddit, Discord, hobbyist forums, support groups, and arguably even email. 'The New Zealand Bill of Rights guarantees us the right to freedom of expression, the ability to seek, send and receive information, and this applies to people under the age of 16 too. They have the right to communicate with each other, their friends, and their family, and the modern reality is that they use social media to do so.' says Thomas Beagle. 'But they're doing more than that: we've seen youth-led political movements such as JustSpeak, School Strike 4 Climate and the Make It 16 campaigns all use social media to organise political campaigns. This bill is a gross imposition on their rights and a terrible discouragement to just the sort of politically active people our country needs.' The bill puts the responsibility on the platforms to determine the age of their users, and we are concerned that this might lead to New Zealanders being forced to provide identity documents and other evidence to both local and foreign platform providers, who already know far too much about us and are happy to sell that information to others. However, the bill is very light on detail with the tricky specifics to be developed in regulation (making the whole regulatory process susceptible to lobbying and corruption). The New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties opposes this bill as unreasonable in principle and unworkable in practice and believes it should not be progressed if selected for introduction.
Scoop
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
We Can't Just Turn Off The Internet For Those Under 16
The NZ Council for Civil Liberties opposes the Social Media Age-Restricted Users Bill presented by National MP Catherine Wedd with support from Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, which would ban those under 16 from accessing social media. The bill's definition of social media is incredibly broad and includes any platform where the primary purpose is to 'enable social interactions between 2 or more end-users'. This would include the obvious contenders such as Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter/X, YouTube, and Instagram, but also describes a large range of other sites such as Reddit, Discord, hobbyist forums, support groups, and arguably even email. 'The New Zealand Bill of Rights guarantees us the right to freedom of expression, the ability to seek, send and receive information, and this applies to people under the age of 16 too. They have the right to communicate with each other, their friends, and their family, and the modern reality is that they use social media to do so.' says Thomas Beagle. 'But they're doing more than that: we've seen youth-led political movements such as JustSpeak, School Strike 4 Climate and the Make It 16 campaigns all use social media to organise political campaigns. This bill is a gross imposition on their rights and a terrible discouragement to just the sort of politically active people our country needs.' The bill puts the responsibility on the platforms to determine the age of their users, and we are concerned that this might lead to New Zealanders being forced to provide identity documents and other evidence to both local and foreign platform providers, who already know far too much about us and are happy to sell that information to others. However, the bill is very light on detail with the tricky specifics to be developed in regulation (making the whole regulatory process susceptible to lobbying and corruption). The New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties opposes this bill as unreasonable in principle and unworkable in practice and believes it should not be progressed if selected for introduction.
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.
