Neil Sands
Tech experts have warned that banning children from social media is a quick fix destined to fail, and such restrictions may actually exacerbate the dangers young people face online by driving their activities underground.
An inquiry by Parliament’s Education & Workforce Select Committee into the online harm that children encounter online heard evidence this week from a range of legal professionals who focus on technology.
Many questioned the effectiveness of blanket restrictions, such as a proposed ban on under-16s accessing social media put forward in a private member’s bill from National MP Catherine Wedd.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has enthusiastically backed the bill, saying it is popular with parents and will help prevent online bullying, harmful content and social media addiction.
But Michael des Tombe, chief legal advisor at Netsafe, said that while bans may seem an appealingly simple solution to a complex problem, children would inevitably find a way to circumvent them.
“We don’t think that quick-fix proposals like age-bans or delays are the answer… The unintended consequence is that children will go behind their parents’ backs, they’ll use VPNs, they’ll go to other unregulated websites,” he told the committee.
“[Then] because it’s happening under the radar, children may be harmed and there won’t be an appropriate response.”
Arran Hunt
Arran Hunt, a partner at McVeagh Fleming, compared young people’s use of social media to children playing rugby. Both activities carry a risk of harm but also provide benefits, which is why children’s rugby continues to be played, but with the rules changed to minimise harm.
“Don’t ban it. Just make it better,” he said. “It’s similar with social media. We want to make it safer, we want to make it better, not just a ban.”
Avoiding rabbit holes
Netsafe’s submission to the committee highlighted the fragmented nature of policy responsibilities around online harm in New Zealand, echoing concerns raised by The Law Association of New Zealand’s (TLANZ) Technology & Law Committee.
The Department of Internal Affairs looks after digital safety, but also in the mix is the Ministry of Education (digital safety education in schools), Ministry of Justice (Harmful Digital Communications Act policy), MBIE (scams) and the Ministry of Health (mental health and wellbeing).
In addition, online content is variously regulated through the criminal law, the Classifications Office, the Broadcasting Standards regime and voluntary industry bodies such as the Media Council.
Netsafe, a registered charity, is the approved agency to take complaints under the Harmful Digital Communications Act (HDCA).
Des Tombe said Netsafe does not have regulatory powers and tried to address issues through negotiated settlements and a voluntary code of conduct for online platforms.
“We’re not an enforcer, we’re not a regulator,” he said. “So, we don’t have powers to compel evidence or compel platforms to act in a particular way.”
Netsafe called for an urgent review of the HDCA to address emerging issues such as artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content, including deepfakes. It said updated legislation could also introduce proactive duties of care for platforms and streamline enforcement functions.
Netsafe suggested measures to make online platforms more accountable and reduce harm, including proactive moderation by humans and preventing addictive design features such as infinite scroll and autoplay.
Hunt said apps could be required to offer algorithm-free accounts for children.
“So, if you are on YouTube, you’re on TikTok, then you’re only actually seeing who you follow, what your friends are up to. You’re not going down the rabbit holes or other things pushing in that direction,” he said.
‘Striking as balance’
There were a variety of views from submitters on how to make platforms more responsible, including tougher legislation and/or codes of practice, which some thought should be mandatory while others favoured a voluntary approach.
In terms of taking the lead on the issue of online harm, Netsafe said it was “agnostic” on whether this should involve creating a new regulator or just re-ordering policy responsibilities within government agencies.
There was widespread support for better education about online issues, giving both children and parents the tools to recognise and deal with risks.
Lloyd Gallagher
Lloyd Gallagher, convenor of the TLANZ tech committee, said this was needed because legislation could not precisely define every potential harm in the complex and rapidly evolving online world.
“I think a balance has to be struck between stopping the mischief, creating accountability, but also not stopping young people from learning how to protect themselves online, because the online systems are always going to evolve and create harm. So we need to have that balance,” he said.
Former District Court Judge David Harvey
Former District Court Judge David Harvey pointed to a recent report from the United Kingdom’s House of Lords’ Communications and Digital Committee, which called for action to boost media literacy, including digital content.
“There are three major thrusts there,” Harvey said. “One is to embed digital literacy or media literacy across the school curriculum. The second is to demand more from the platforms in terms of content control, and the third is to enhance digital literacy, or media literacy across the arms of government.”
The Education & Workforce Select Committee is scheduled to submit the inquiry’s final report by the end of November.
0 Comments