Legislation amending the Online Safety Act to ban kids under 16 from social media was floated in Parliament this morning. It's pretty fresh so there isn't much analysis or reaction to it yet, but we do have a definition of what constitutes an "age-restricted social media platform". Unsurprisingly, it's incredibly broad and has a clause in it that allows the government to hand pick a service and say "this is an age-restricted social media platform" even if it doesn't meet the criteria. The legislation also doesn't set out how platforms need to ban kids, just that there's a civil penalty if they don't. Now we wait for it to land in the Senate for some political debate to froth up before a minor tweak is made and the ALP & LNP team up to pass it. Comms minister's press release is here if you want to read the party line. If you have any objections to the law, you have 24 hours to provide it - what a shitshow.
Meanwhile, that Social Media Summit put on by the SA government a few months ago was a sham. While it was pitched as a way for the government to get feedback and consult stakeholders (industry, parents, the kids themselves), we now know thanks to an FOI from Crikey's Cam Wilson that the SA premier told Jonathan Haidt (the author of a book on this topic that's enamored politicians worldwide despite incredibly weak science) that the summit was actually put on "with the intent of building momentum and support for national legislation to enforce a minimum age for access to social media". The rub salt into the wound, "a group of academics met with Michelle Rowland's office and the prime minister's office" and were told they'd take their feedback onboard "only after the bill has been passed". Pig headed motherfucking politicians, all of them.
One of the studies the communications minister throws around as evidence we desperately need to ban kids from social media doesn't say that at all according to it's co-author. Cam Wilson again, contacted a co-author of the study over at the University of Oxford and let him know about how it's being used as fodder for a ban, who responded with "I do not agree that it provides the justification for this policy. I think they have misunderstood the purpose and findings of our research" and instead recommend "targeted interventions that address the negative consequences of social media while also promoting its positive uses" - which align with the eSafety Commissioner's findings from last year, a parliamentary committee's report and 140+ experts that wrote an open letter to the minister saying not to do this.
Constable Canute tries to hold up the great wave on the Internet, 1999 (Geoff Pryor / National Library of Australia)
😎 The Sizzle is curated by Anthony "decryption" Agius and emailed every weekday afternoon.
💬 Checked out the paid subscriber only forum? It's a tidy little place to discuss tech with like minded Aussies.
👋 Forums not your thing? The Sizzle has a Slack group you can procrastinate in and chat with other nerds bored at work.
💳 Paid subscriber looking to manage your billing info, change email address or cancel your subscription? Visit the customer portal.
🎁 Make someone's day and buy them a 12 month gift subscription to The Sizzle.
📚 Browse The Sizzle Archive. A few issues are missing and it's not searchable, but it's better than nothing.
🫂 Friends of The Sizzle is a small group of businesses or organisations operated by Sizzle subscribers. Support your fellow Sizzler!
💔 Tired of my bullshit? Unsubscribe and I'll never speak to you again.
The Sizzle is created on Wathaurong land and acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia, recognising their continuing connection to land, water and community. I pay my respect to them and their cultures and to elders both past and present.