The more governments try to restrict social media use, the more young people will find ways to get around it
This ban already had a number of broad issues, including the possibility of every Australian being required to hand over personal identification in order to use social media websites. We've already seen the UK's Online Safety Act making global headlines over the past week, where it is proving to be a nightmare for enforcement.
Let's be clear: the harmful content the federal government keeps referencing isn't going anywhere. This content (excluding videos already restricted to those over 18) can still be viewed by anyone in a logged-out state or by teenagers using the account of their parents. Once you turn 16, there is nothing stopping you from accessing the content, and it could just as easily lead to a negative impact.
What this ban does do, however, is effectively punish teenagers, even those who have always had overwhelmingly positive experiences from YouTube. Parents who are more than happy for their teenager to use YouTube with an account are not given any exemptions, despite the government's repeated line that the social media ban gives power back to the parents.
The reason for YouTube's initial exemption was education, something I can personally attest to as a current year 12 student. After remote learning ended, YouTube continued to be used as a key tool for learning, both during and outside of school hours. This includes simple things such as a homework task involving taking down notes from a video, to a teacher uploading their own set of videos for a particular subject unit for student viewing anytime and anywhere. There have even been more than a few instances of teachers recommending subscribing to an educational channel, which I know has been a help to me and many of my peers.
That's not to say YouTube isn't also a source of harmful content. But while there's no perfect solution for keeping young people safe online, there are clear steps that could and should be taken by the federal and state governments. And it starts in the classroom.
From the late stages of primary school into secondary school, repeated lessons on ways to report content and dangers to look out for (among many other things to teach) would be a welcome addition. Crucially, this prevents the entire burden being on parents, many of whom are not tech-savvy by their own admissions.
Simply saying 'don't do this' has never worked for any generation of teenagers, and it doesn't work for keeping them offline in this day and age. The more parents – or for that matter, governments – try to force a restriction on social media use, the more young people will be motivated to get around it.
Additionally, measures to actually target the platforms, rather than the teens who use them, would make a lot more sense. Exactly what those measures would be is a further question, but we already know the government has plenty of tools at its disposal, such as the eSafety commissioner, if it's looking for a direct fight with tech giants.
With a high court challenge from Google seemingly looming, it's worth remembering that – like it or not – Australia is far from the largest market for social media companies. This means it's not beyond the realm of possibility that these platforms could abandon Australia altogether rather than follow this legislation, just as Facebook did with news for a short period in 2021. I'm personally not convinced that will end up happening, but it also doesn't require that much imagination.
Banning teens from accessing YouTube through their own account isn't going to stop harmful content in the slightest. Genuine problems need genuine solutions, but the social media ban isn't one of those.
Leo Puglisi is chief anchor and managing director at 6 News Australia
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
No 10 could recognise Palestinian state with Hamas in power
Last week, a senior Hamas official welcomed the Prime Minister's promise to recognise Palestine, saying that 'victory and liberation are closer than we expected'. Basem Naim, a former minister in the terror group's government of Gaza, said: 'International support for Palestinian self-determination shows we are moving in the right direction.' The UK has had discussions with Mahmoud Abbas, the head of the Palestinian Authority, about how to reform the governance of Gaza as part of international efforts to end the conflict. Sir Keir was accused by Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, of rewarding Hamas by promising to recognise a Palestinian state in the absence of a peace process. He was also criticised by hostage families, and one British hostage released earlier this year said that the Prime Minister's announcement amounted to 'rewarding terror'. Downing Street again failed to confirm whether the release of the hostages would be a precondition to recognition. The Prime Minister's spokesman said: 'We've always said that Hamas must release hostages unconditionally and immediately, that's been our long-standing demand. 'The Foreign Secretary has also been clear, Hamas are not the Palestinian people. 'It's always been our position that statehood is the inalienable right to the Palestinian people, and that's why we're focused on delivering a path towards long term peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians.' Last week, Hamas released a video of an emaciated Israeli hostage digging his own grave inside a small tunnel in Gaza. The Prime Minister's spokesman called the images 'completely abhorrent' and added: 'It underlines what the Prime Minister has previously said, including to hostage families, that Hamas must release all hostages immediately and unconditionally.'
Sky News
24 minutes ago
- Sky News
No 10 decline to say if Palestine will be recognised with Hamas in power
The prime minister's spokesman has refused eight times to confirm whether recognition of Palestine could go ahead if Hamas remain in power and the hostages are not released. Keir Starmer's spokesman was questioned by journalists for the first time since the announcement last week that the UK will formally recognise the state in September - unless Israel meets certain conditions including abiding by a ceasefire and increasing aid. The policy has been criticised by the families of UK hostages, campaigners and some Labour MPs, who argue it would reward Hamas and say it should be conditional on the release of the remaining hostages. A senior Hamas politician, Ghazi Hamad, speaking to Al Jazeera, said at the weekend that major nations' decision to recognise a Palestinian state "is one of the fruits of 7 October". The PM's spokesman said on Monday: "The PM is clear that on 7 October, Hamas committed the worst act of terror in Israel's history. That horror has continued since then. "As the foreign secretary said over the weekend, Hamas are rightly pariahs who can have no role in Gaza's future, there is a diplomatic consensus on that. Hamas must immediately release all hostages and have no role in the governance of Gaza." But asked whether removing Hamas from power and releasing hostages were conditions for statehood, he said a decision on recognition would be made at the UN General Assembly meeting in September, based on "an assessment of how far the parties have met the steps we have set out. No one side will have veto on recognition through their actions or inactions." 2:25 He added: "Our focus is on the immediate situation on the ground, getting more aid in to end the suffering in Gaza and supporting a ceasefire and a long-term peace for Israelis and Palestinians based a two-state solution." Starmer, who recalled his cabinet for an emergency meeting last week before setting out the new position, is following the lead of French president Emmanuel Macron, who first pledged to move toward recognising Palestinian statehood in April. Canada has also backed recognition if conditions are met, including by the Palestinian Authority. The prime minister had previously said he would recognise a state of Palestine as part of a contribution to a peace process. 3:05 In his announcement last Tuesday, he said: "We need to see at least 500 trucks entering Gaza every day. But ultimately, the only way to bring this humanitarian crisis to an end is through a long-term settlement. "So we are supporting the US, Egyptian and Qatari efforts to secure a vital ceasefire. That ceasefire must be sustainable and it must lead to a wider peace plan, which we are developing with our international partners. "I've always said we will recognise a Palestinian state as a contribution to a proper peace process, at the moment of maximum impact for the two-state solution. With that solution now under threat, this is the moment to act." Adam Rose, a lawyer acting for British families of hostages in Gaza, has said: "Why would Hamas agree to a ceasefire if it knew that to do so would make British recognition of Palestine less likely?"
The Independent
41 minutes ago
- The Independent
Hundreds ready to be arrested at mass protest against Palestine Action terror ban
At least 500 people are expected to take part in a pro-Palestine protest on Saturday that could see them arrested under terrorism laws for holding up signs. The action, which is planned for Westminster, will force police to confront the impact of a new order proscribing protest group Palestine Action as a terror organisation. Activists who oppose the group's ban will hold up signs on Saturday expressing support for the organisation, an act which is now an offence under section 13 of the Terrorism Act. Organisers from Defend our Juries, who are co-ordinating the action, told The Independent that they were 'very confident' it would go ahead with at least 500 people involved. Protesters plan to sit together and hold up signs saying: 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action'. But the prime minister's spokesperson warned those planning to take part that they may 'yet not know the true nature of this organisation', telling reporters: 'This is not a peaceful or non-violent protest group.' A police source also told The Guardian that anyone demonstrating in support of Palestine Action would be arrested at the weekend. They said: 'However we have to do it, they will be arrested for breaking terrorism laws' Organisers will make a final decision on whether the protest will go ahead tomorrow. The government's proscription of Palestine Action as a terror group is currently being challenged in the High Court, with a court case expected later in the autumn. In a judgement allowing the court case to go ahead, Mr Justice Chamberlain said it was 'reasonably arguable' that the proscription 'amounts to a disproportionate interference' of Huda Ammori, the co-founder of the group's, rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Home secretary Yvette Cooper decided to proscribe the group after activists allegedly broke into RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and sprayed two military planes with red paint. Court papers said she was hesistant to proscribe the group, but that the CPS advised acting early to minimise the risk of prejudice in the upcoming trial of Palestine Action protesters in November. Describing their planned action on Saturday, Tim Crosland, from Defend Our Juries, said: 'We're just exercising our democratic rights to freedom of assembly. Our plans are online, this is an open transparent campaign against an order that the UN has said is unnecessary. There isn't any secret plot. 'We think at least 500 people will be involved although there is no fool proof way of knowing. Some people are travelling into London from around the country and some people are saying they might come from Holland for it'. He added: 'Holding a sign is in some ways a much more gentle ask than getting onto gantries, or breaking into a base, or anything like that. But because of the [proscription] order that simple act of peaceful protest is an offence under the terror act. We are letting people know that the risks are very very substantial, but if enough of us do it then there is safety in numbers'. In a briefing for protesters, Defend Our Juries advises people that there is a substantial risk of arrest and that the Met Police has arrested people under section 13 of the Terrorism Act. This makes it an offence to wear an item of clothing or display an article that arouses 'reasonable suspicion that [the wearer] is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation'. The document advises people that 'if enough of us take a stand, then it is unlikely any charges will be brought'. Outside of London, some protesters have had their homes raided and technology seized. One 80-year-old woman was arrested at a rally in Cardiff and had her home searched. She said officers removed iPads, a Palestine flag, books on Palestine, and material related to Extinction Rebellion. In the brief, Defend Our Juries warn participants that if they are taking action outside London they should warn any housemates that their homes could be searched. Recommendations also include removing tech from the house, having a decoy phone, laptop or Ipad, and if they are vulnerable to put a note on the front door stating 'I am elderly and will take longer to answer the door'. The prime minister's spokesperson told reporters on Monday that 'those who seek to support this group [Palestine Action] may yet not know the true nature of this organisation, but people should be under no illusions: this is not a peaceful or non-violent protest group. 'We're also clear that their activities do not reflect or represent the thousands of people across this country who continue to exercise their fundamental right to protest on difficult, different issues'.
