Law & Society: Social media ban for kids? The name is wrong and the bill is flawed
The Social Media Age-Appropriate Users Bill has been touted as a way of preventing people aged under 16 from accessing social media platforms, according to publicity and indeed its proponents in the National Party.
Under this bill, social media platforms will be required to take reasonable steps to put in place an age-verification system. If a proposed user cannot verify their age as over 16, they can't open an account.
But a careful reading says otherwise of the proposed bill, which is currently a private member's bill and will not be considered unless it is drawn from the 'biscuit tin', a form of legislative lottery.
The critical definition within the bill is that of an 'age-restricted social media platform'. A social media platform has a specific definition which does not include all applications available on the internet. WhatsApp, for example, would be unlikely to fulfil the definition, although the bill does allow for such platforms to be designated in the regulations as social media platforms.
The fact that the bill states access will be restricted only to platforms that are designated by the minister immediately narrows the focus.
It means the bill does not take people under the age of 16 off line in the sense that they will be unable to access any social media platforms.
There is no language in the bill that suggests that all social media platforms must have an age verification system, or language that states that any person under the age of 16 is prohibited from accessing a social media platform.
Should the bill become law, the battleground will be in persuading or dissuading the minister from designating a social media platform as age-restricted.
Clearly, the media reports about the proposed policy have been erroneous and lacking in nuance. The responsibility for this lies primarily in the hands of media who have headlined the proposal as a 'social media ban'.
It would have been helpful had it been made clear that the bill would not automatically apply to all social media platforms but only to those which fulfilled the requirements set out.
The bill that I have seen is flawed in a number of respects and there are what could be called unintended consequences. This is an example.
When the minister designates a social media platform as an age-restricted one, that platform must introduce an age-verification system. Anyone – not just an under-16-year-old – who wants to set up an account must go through the age-verification process.
That means adults who could legitimately access the platform would also have to provide evidence of age, leading to personal data that would not otherwise have been collected being stored. There are significant data gathering and privacy implications in this.
That tech-savvy under-16-year-olds will work out the various ways available to circumvent age restrictions is more than likely. One reason for doing so will be the challenge that is presented, and another will be 'because they can'. Yet another will be that they want to stay in touch. After all, the internet is a communications system. Social media platforms enable and enhance that communication. And this proposal will neither prevent nor prohibit the use of all social media platforms by under-16s.
It is fortunate that the government has decided to fully investigate the issue of under-16 access to social media under the watchful eye of Education Minister Erica Stanford. The bill will remain in the biscuit tin but future proposals may be better crafted.
David Harvey is a retired district court judge.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
Luxon to tell National faithful country is 'turning the corner'
Luxon to tell National faithful "we're turning the corner" National leader Christopher Luxon. Photo: RNZ / Nick Monro National Party members are gathering in Christchurch to cap off a week in which MPs attempted to steer public minds back towards the government's cost of living policies. Members will also farewell a party stalwart, with former president Peter Goodfellow retiring from National's board of directors. While leader Christopher Luxon will be speaking to the converted, he will be acutely aware the cost of living has become front of mind . Earlier this week, he was asked what his message to the party faithful would be. "Look, they know it's been a tough time, they know that we're turning the corner," Luxon said. "But really ... this country's got great potential and a great future ahead of it, and we've just got to keep working at it." National's deputy leader, Nicola Willis, said the conference would be focused on the steps the government was taking to make the country "an easier, better place to do business, to hire people, to create well paying jobs". "It is our job as a government not to moan about the things we can't control, but to focus on how we can make things better here in New Zealand, and we're very proud of the efforts we're making," she said. It is a stark contrast to this time last year, where Luxon's message ahead of the first conference since National returned to government was its focus on action and delivery . It shows just how much the cost of living crisis is lingering, and National has spent the week attempting to convince the public it has got it under control. With no announcement to make at this week's post-Cabinet press conference (bar the card surcharge ban, which had already been announced), Luxon and Willis gave a more than 10-minute address about the economy and cost of living, and actions the government had taken. "The most important thing we can do to make you better off is to double-down on our long-term economic plan," Luxon said. Willis used her speech to remind people of National's tax changes, FamilyBoost policy and a falling Official Cash Rate. It prompted Labour to accuse the government of "more spin than a front-load washing machine" . The latest Ipsos Issues Monitor has Labour in front of National as the party New Zealanders consider most able to handle the cost of living, despite releasing no substantive policy since the election. In 2023, National won 38.06 percent of the party vote, but since then has failed to poll above that. Recent polls have had National in the low thirties, with some showing the left bloc would have enough numbers to form a government. Other polls give the coalition the numbers to form a government, but only just. National party ministers will hold panels on health, education, law and order, agriculture, and the economy and cost of living. Members will also elect board positions. Long-serving board member and former party president Peter Goodfellow will be retiring from the board. Goodfellow was president from 2009 to 2022 before stepping down but remaining on the board. ANZCO Foods founder Sir Graeme Harrison, who joined the National board in 2021, has also decided to retire. Current board member Rachel Bird is up for re-election. Under National's constitution and rules, board members serve three years and then retire. They can then be eligible for re-election. Craig Carr, Andrew von Dadelszen and Edgar Wilson have also put their names forward for the vacancies. Party president Sylvia Wood and board members Jannita Pilisi, Stefan Sunde and David Ryan are not up for re-election, and so will remain on the board. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
NZ Herald
17 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Trump's lawyer in hush money trial is a senior Justice Department official and interviewed Ghislaine Maxwell
After weeks of furore about whether the Justice Department would release much of its file on Epstein – and amid speculation about whether the file had information about Trump and others – Blanche travelled to Florida to interview Epstein's longtime partner, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking. A billboard in Times Square calls for the release of the Epstein files on July 23 in New York City. Photo / Getty Images Prosecutors argued at Maxwell's 2021 trial that she was Epstein's recruiter and enabler for a decade beginning in 1994, showing an interest in teenagers and luring them to his homes in Palm Beach, Florida; New York; New Mexico; and elsewhere ostensibly for jobs as personal masseuses. She was also charged with perjury for allegedly lying during a sworn deposition but did not face a trial on those charges after she was convicted of more serious crimes. Trump said this week that his friendship with Epstein ended years ago after, he said, Epstein hired young female spa workers from his club at Mar-a-Lago. Maxwell spent nine hours over two days last week answering every question posed by Blanche, according to Maxwell's lawyer, David Oscar Markus. The details of the interview have not been released, and Democrats said they feared it was the kind of conflict, they had been concerned about when Blanche was nominated. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (Democrat-New York) said last week in a floor speech that 'Trump is sending his personal lawyer, Todd Blanche, to try and execute a corrupt cover-up, potentially offering leniency to a woman who also abused the victims'. Schumer said this and other actions by Justice officials represent a conflict but he did not provide evidence of an alleged cover-up. The relationship between Trump and Blanche has been a financially significant one. Blanche's law firm was paid US$9.2 million ($15.6m) by Save America, a pro-Trump political action committee, between April 2023 and December 2024, for work on cases that included the trial about payment of alleged hush money to adult-film star Stormy Daniels, according to federal election records. Trump was found guilty in the hush money case, which has been appealed and is being handled by other lawyers. Why Donald Trump's lawyer is under scrutiny in Jeffrey Epstein inquiry. Photo / Getty Images Blanche, 50, is an unlikely player in the unfolding drama. A former federal prosecutor in New York, he handled violent crimes and led the office's White Plains division in Westchester County. Blanche was well-liked by colleagues and earned a reputation for diligence, according to lawyers familiar with his work. He then worked at a law firm where his clients included Trump ally Paul Manafort. Blanche won the dismissal of mortgage fraud charges against Manafort in a New York case in 2019 on the grounds that the indictment too closely mirrored a federal case against him and amounted to double jeopardy. The case helped bring Blanche to Trump's attention at a time when he was preparing to run for re-election. Trump later pardoned Manafort in a pair of federal cases that included the federal mortgage fraud charges. The Justice Department did not respond directly to questions from the Washington Post about whether Blanche consulted a government ethics official regarding an interview with Maxwell. Instead, the department sent a written statement from spokesman Gates McGavick that said, in full: 'Any suggestion that Todd Blanche has acted unethically while serving as Deputy Attorney General is baseless and defamatory. This gossip column relies on innuendo and the word of an agenda-driven political hack to push a false narrative. This is not a serious article.' Markus said in a statement that it was appropriate for the Justice Department to send a high-level official such as Blanche to address such an important matter and that Blanche 'has conducted himself with complete professionalism throughout this process'. 'It's truly disheartening how quick people are to assume the worst without any basis in fact,' Markus added. 'More akin to a political player' Some of Blanche's ex-colleagues are surprised by what they see as his transformation from the independent litigator they knew to one they say seems willing to prioritise his loyalty to Trump. Mimi Rocah, who previously co-led the White Plains division in the US Attorney's office for the Southern District of New York with Blanche, said that it is 'completely inappropriate and wrong' for him to interview Maxwell – both because of his relationship to Trump and because it is a job that should be reserved for prosecutors on the case, not a Justice official at the highest level. Mimi Rocah (centre) criticised Blanche's interview with Maxwell as 'completely inappropriate', citing his Trump ties and the breach of prosecutorial protocol. Photo / Getty Images If a top Washington official had injected himself into a case Blanche handled as a prosecutor, he would have gone 'running to Main Justice', Rocah said, referring to the department's headquarters in Washington that oversees US Attorneys' offices and other units. 'That just shows how completely far gone he is as an actual prosecutor,' Rocah said. 'He's really more akin to a political player at this point.' In a podcast interview last year hosted by Markus, Blanche recounted receiving a phone call from Trump when he was skiing with his family in Colorado on Super Bowl Sunday in February 2023. At this time before Trump had been indicted, the former President talked with Blanche about representing him in what would become the hush money trial and possibly other cases. A few weeks later, Blanche said, he went to dinner with Trump to discuss his potential hiring. 'And we clicked,' Blanche said. 'He's an enigma, he's an interesting guy, everybody in this country, most people in the world, frankly, have an opinion about him. 'And some may be right, some may be wrong, but he's a really interesting man. And not only because of his past as President of the US, but just the life that he's led.' Around that time, he left the New York firm and started Blanche Law, enlisting as a partner Emil Bove, a former Southern District colleague who later joined the Justice Department at the start of Trump's second term and was nominated for a federal appeals judgeship. Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and 900 former Justice Department lawyers have questioned Bove's fitness to serve. That's based on his handling of a corruption indictment against New York Mayor Eric Adams, allegations that he instructed underlings to ignore judicial orders, and his role in firing or reassigning career Justice Department employees in perceived politically driven punishments. In February, Blanche – not yet confirmed by the Senate – was in attendance as Bove stood in court to defend his decision to dismiss the Adams case, arguing that the mayor needed to be unburdened so he could help the Trump Administration carry out its immigration enforcement and public safety agenda. Blanche was also there when Bove, who was also a defence lawyer for Trump, faced tough questions at his confirmation hearing last month. Bove was confirmed by the Senate 50-49 on Wednesday. Blanche, who had been a registered Democrat as recently as 2022, switched his registration to Republican in January 2024 and said his voting record residence was Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, a community near Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, according to voter records. He spent much of 2024 as a key legal adviser to Trump – spending long hours in Palm Beach with Trump and attending court appearances and meetings up and down the East Coast. The lawyer was the face of Trump's legal team during a six-week trial in New York Supreme Court, where a jury heard evidence that the former President concealed the nature of a US$130,000 payment to Daniels in the final stretch of the 2016 election to keep her quiet about an alleged affair. Blanche recalled in the podcast interview with Markus how Trump 'heard 'guilty' 34 times' in the hush money trial and then spoke to the press. 'For somebody who had just gone through what he went through, I was like, I mean, it sounds maybe a little bit obnoxious to say, but I was like, really, really proud of him on that day.' Throughout the trial, Trump turned the hallway into a campaign stop for news cameras. A stone-faced Blanche stood at his side as the then-candidate launched into meandering tirades about what he called a Democratic conspiracy to use the justice system to keep him from retaking the White House. Todd Blanche's Epstein case role has sparked conflict of interest concerns. Photo / Getty Images Aggressive delay efforts by Blanche and other lawyers helped stall proceedings in a pair of serious federal cases brought by special counsel Jack Smith over Trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago and refusing to return them, and for allegedly interfering in the 2020 election. Both matters were unresolved as the 2024 election neared. The classified records case in Florida was dismissed by Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon on grounds that experts widely believed were flawed and reversible. Smith's team was appealing that decision, but after Trump's victory, they moved to withdraw those cases before Trump took office. Blanche and the defence team also secured so many sentencing delays in the hush money case that the proceeding did not take place until 10 days before Trump's inauguration. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan acknowledged having very limited options. Trump was sentenced to unconditional discharge, which amounted to no punishment. 'I will follow the law' Trump, known for frequently firing lawyers when they fall out of favour with him, has showered Blanche with praise for his work on the cases. The closeness between Trump and Blanche continued during the election and culminated in Trump's announcement that he would nominate his lawyer to serve as deputy attorney-general. In his hearing, Blanche sounded fully in sync with Trump's messaging as he said that the President had been a victim of 'partisan prosecutors' but that his 'faith in this country returned in full force on November 5 when the American people rejected this gross abuse of our justice system'. There is a long history of former Trump associates who have been ousted by the President over questions of loyalty. Attorney-General Jeff Sessions recused himself from being involved in the investigation of whether there was Russian interference in the 2016 election, sparking Trump's ire. At another point, Trump said it was 'disgraceful' that Sessions had asked an inspector general to investigate a campaign-related matter, saying, 'Why not use Justice Department lawyers?' Sessions resigned in 2018 at Trump's request. So when Trump nominated Blanche to the No 2 job at Justice, Democrats repeatedly asked during the nomination hearing whether he would push back against Trump and show the independence that is required of Justice officials. Senator Blumenthal voiced concern Blanche might face illegal or immoral requests from Trump and must be ready to say no. Photo / Getty Images Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) said during the hearing that he was 'convinced' that Blanche was committed to impartial enforcement. Nonetheless, Blumenthal expressed concern that, 'if history is any guide, that the President will ask you to do things that are illegal or immoral. I need to be sure that you're willing to say no' to Trump. 'Senator, I respectfully very much reject that premise,' Blanche responded. 'I don't think that President Trump is going to ask me to do anything illegal or immoral and so I don't -' 'But if he does, you would say no?' Blumenthal asked. 'I will follow the law Senator, period - period … And by the way, I've spent thousands, certainly hundreds, probably thousands of hours with President Trump over the past couple of years. So I don't just say that flippantly; I say that with experience and firsthand knowledge.' Experts say that ethics law can be a grey area subject to interpretation in each unique case. In the normal course of events, Blanche would have been advised about the standard of conduct for federal employees, which includes this provision: 'Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts.' Several months after Blanche joined the Justice Department, as the controversy over the Epstein files exploded, Blanche said on X that he was going to interview Maxwell. 'Justice demands courage. For the first time, the Department of Justice is reaching out to Ghislaine Maxwell to ask: what do you know?' Blanche wrote. At the direction of Attorney-General Pam Bondi, he said, he had contacted Maxwell's counsel, adding that 'No one is above the law - and no lead is off-limits'. As it happened, the lawyer representing Maxwell was Markus, the same person to whom Blanche had given the podcast interview in June 2024 about his relationship with Trump. Blanche and Markus came to an agreement, leading to the interviews with Maxwell – and to the questions from Democrats about whether Blanche had a conflict in conducting the private sessions. Blumenthal, who opposed Blanche's nomination, said he nonetheless expected the lawyer to follow ethical norms. He said he has been shocked by Blanche's decision to insert himself into the Maxwell interview, which the senator said was 'a breach'. 'I really expected him to be a serious lawyer,' Blumenthal said in an interview with the Washington Post. 'He had a reputation for being with a big firm and representing the client in difficult circumstances. I respect people who represent unpopular causes or individuals, that's what a lawyer does.' But Blumenthal said 'there's this stench' about Blanche interviewing Maxwell 'that is so powerful it is absolutely mind-boggling, and I frankly would never have expected it of him'. Norm Eisen said he'd never have approved Blanche's role due to impartiality concerns. Photo / Getty Images Norm Eisen, who was the White House special counsel for ethics in the Obama Administration, said in an interview that he would never have authorised that Blanche interview Maxwell because of rules that seek to prevent conflict of interest. 'This is the very definition of the situation where a reasonable person would question the impartiality of Blanche,' Eisen said. 'There is a certain amount of play in these rules, but that is why the public should be concerned … I don't know any government ethicist who worked for any administration of either party who would have authorised Blanche to participate in this.' Unless interview transcripts are released, it may be impossible to know whether and how much Blanche pursued questions about Trump's possible mention in the Epstein files. For his part, Blanche has insisted his loyalty is to the Justice Department. 'This Department of Justice does not shy away from uncomfortable truths, nor from responsibility to pursue justice wherever the facts may lead,' Blanche said in a July 22 statement on X.
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Ex-National MP Jami-Lee Ross seeks political comeback
Jami-Lee Ross. Photo: RNZ / Simon Rogers Jami-Lee Ross, the former National MP who explosively laid a police complaint against his then leader, is standing in local politics . Ross has confirmed he wants a spot on the Howick Local Board in Auckland in the upcoming local elections. "I spent six years on the Manukau City Council before a decade spent in Parliament. I understand council and government processes well and I can put those skills to good use working at a local board level," he said in a statement. In 2018, Ross sensationally went to police claiming former National Party leader Simon Bridges asked him to collect and split a large donation to avoid disclosure rules. It followed an extraordinary and tumultuous time at Parliament - where Ross resigned and accused Bridges of corruption. There were secret recordings, photos released on X (formerly Twitter) , It was reported at the time as a leak scandal and full-blown turmoil . Bridges accused Ross of "lying, leaking and lashing out". In a bitter exit from the National Party, Ross went independent and said he had a mental breakdown as pressure ramped up on him to leave the party. In the end it was Ross and others charged by the Serious Fraud Office after his police complaint. Ross would be cleared of fraud charges after a trial. Jami-Lee Ross speaks to media after making a complaint to police about National Party leader, Simon Bridges. Photo: RNZ / Rebekah Parsons-King There were also allegations he manipulated and entrapped women . In 2019, Ross used his social media platforms to say sorry to everyone he hurt, including Bridges. He said he began struggling with mental health as his job and relationships began deteriorating. After leaving Parliament, Ross had since been reported to be running an escort agency where some women reportedly had concerns for their conditions, welfare and safety. Ross said today he is to make a contribution again now it's five years since he left Parliament. "The council and local board have failed to keep up with the rapid growth of the Flat Bush community. There's no library, no swimming pool, no community centre, no real transport connections. Local residents deserve more value for their rates," he said. Ross, who is also a former councillor the old Manukau City Council, said he had the past experience and skillset to be an effective advocate for residents. Nominations for the local elections closed at midday on Friday. 13 August 2018: An update on MPs' expenses was leaked to Newshub. 14 August 2018: Questions immediately began on who had leaked the information before the official list of MPs expenses was made publicly available. Simon Bridges demanded an inquiry. 15 August 2018: Speaker Trevor Mallard announced an inquiry. 24 August 2018: A person claiming to be the National Party leaker sent an anonymous text to Bridges pleading for the inquiry into the leaking of his expenses to be called off. Hours later, Mallard called off the inquiry that was to have been undertaken by Michael Heron QC. 27 August: Bridges said he would be continuing with an inquiry. 4 September 2018: All 56 National MPs signed a privacy waiver to hand over communications dating back to the start of February. 2 October 2018: Jami-Lee Ross stands down from his portfolios and from the front bench of the opposition, citing personal health issues. 15 October 2018: Bridges said the inquiry report identified Ross as the most likely source of the leak, and he accepted that finding. Ross posts a series of tweets saying he was not responsible and that Bridges was trying to pin the leak inquiry on him. 16 October 2018: Ross holds a nearly hour-long press conference announcing he will step down from National and stand as an independent. He alleged Bridges had broken electoral donation law and said he would put in an official police complaint. Ross questioned Bridges' leadership and heavily criticised him. 17 October 2018: Ross emerges from Wellington Police Station after filing his complaint on Bridges. He releases audio of a phone conversation between himself and Bridges. 18 October 2018: Bridges says he's "gutted" by new allegations his former MP Ross manipulated and entrapped women. 22 January 2019: The embattled Botany MP apologises to everyone he hurt the year before, including Bridges who he tried to take down. He says he began struggling with mental health and that his job and his relationships started deteriorating. 30 January 2019: The Speaker announces Ross will not have access to National Party corridors at Parliament. 25 February 2020: Ross and three others plead not guilty to electoral fraud. 2 July 2020: A trial date is set. 15 September 2020: Now independent MP Ross announces he won't be standing for the Botany electorate, but will be on the party list for Advance New Zealand. 6 March 2021: It emerges Ross is behind a company reportedly planning to sell an anti-5G supplement. 7 October 2022: Ross is cleared of fraud charges over political donations, and the judge releases the reasons why. 17 March 2023: Concerns are raised at an escort business reportedly run by Ross. 1 August 2025: Ross confirms he wants a spot on the Howick Local Board in Auckland. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
